Why Republicans object to 'the line' - Julie & Julia (2009) Discussion

[–] tinymortal 14 years ago

really? get over it.

reply

[–] sportsfan79 14 years ago

No.

reply

[–] 14 years ago

[deleted]

[–] artisandy 14 years ago

You answered your own question: "I used to love all forms of comedy; stand-up, sitcoms, comedy movies, etc.. To my great disapointment, that all ENDED when I got older and became more conservative."

All your shows are antagonistic & full of hate speech i.e. Rush limberger, glen buick, etc. what a bore. the liberal shows, i.e. Jon Stuart, Stephen Colbert, those you mentioned, etc. are comedies. They're all satirizing your silly fears & absurd expectations. We can still laugh!!!
How about some new & creative ideas rather than all the whining, drama & temper tantrums? Then you wouldn't look so goofy & childish to us. If your mind was open, you wouldn't be so traumatized.
PS. please don't expect another response from me. because I, like you, have said my piece.

reply

[–] sportsfan79 14 years ago

Sorry artisandy, I was looking for serious / non-trolling replies only.

I do want to respond to one of your points, though. Not intended for you to read, because as you pointed out you will not be back for a dialogue, you just wanted to drop a flame message and leave. But for others who may read it, I want to reinforce the notion that if you weren't a leftist, you WOULDN'T enjoy Jon Stuart, Stephen Colbert, etc. You find them funny in large part because they REINFORCE your worldview. Even though I specifically made that point in my first post, somehow you missed it.

Also, I've never watched Glen Beck, and have rarely heard Rush. It may surprise you that not all conservatives fit into a talk-radio redneck stereotype, even though that's the way we all look in your head.

reply

[–] dagrattle 14 years ago

I had started writing an answer to this a few days ago - a serious answer, that responded to your points - but got caught up in a number of things in real life (which are still going on, so no lengthy postin' for me...).

But I don't think you can say, "if you weren't a leftist, you wouldn't enjoy Jon Stuart, Steven Colbert, etc" and then in the next paragraph say that you don't watch Glen Beck or Rush Limbaugh. You're implicitly doing the same stereotyping that you're accusing others of.

reply

[–] sportsfan79 14 years ago

Respectfully, I disagree with this.

When someone who knows little about me characterizes me as a person who enjoys listening to "hate speech", such as Rush L. and Glen B., that's some fairly offensive stereotyping, and incorrect as well. When I reply with the suggestion (notice I used the word "notion") that Jon Stuart and Steven Colbert might be less enjoyable if you are not a leftist, that is not a stereotype. I didn't say "you are a liberal, so you enjoy Jon Stuart" (isn't it Stewart?), I advanced a theory that liberal comedians, TV shows, movies, etc become much less enjoyable if you don't share their politics.

Not the same thing IMO.

reply

[–] liaMSS 14 years ago

not to interrupt, but i thought i'd let you know that my husband is conservative (although more fiscally than socially) and greatly enjoys both Jon Stewart and Stephen Colbert and only occasionally complains that Jon Stewart rags too much on conservatives and not enough on liberals.

this is partly because Jon Stewart DOES point out incredibly stupid things that Democrats do, just not as often. One could argue that he doesn't point out the stupidity of the Democrats with quite as much frequency because Democrats don't do stupid things quite as often, but I think the truth is that Jon Stewart, perhaps not unlike yourself, has gotten more bitter and less patient with the words and actions of the people he disagrees with as he has gotten older (it seems to me that earlier episodes of the Daily Show with Jon Stewart had much less straight out conservative bashing.)

Also, one short comment about your original post -- this movie is based off of two books and two people's real lives; do you know if the comments that you find so offensive are the opinions of the movies makers and not the opinions of the people portrayed in the movie? If Julie Powell and Julia Child really never expressed liberal opinions, than yes, you have a right to be upset. But if, however, this movie is more faithful to real life, I think you should look elsewhere for an example of Hollywood trying to push its leftist agenda.

reply

[–] 14 years ago

[deleted]

[–] braggart 14 years ago

What liberal bias? This movie is really an adaptation of two works -- Julie Powell's book about tackling Child's cookbook and Child's own autobiography. If you have read the latter, you will realize that the moments in the film that have a "liberal bias" are pulled in large part directly from the autobiography. She talks somewhat extensively about her beliefs in relation to her father's, who was more conservative, and how it colored their relationship. So to come here and object, saying that the movie is biased, is really to object to Child's own thoughts and beliefs. Which is fine. But you can not blame a biopic for accurately portraying a liberal as a liberal.

reply

[–] sportsfan79 14 years ago

This is a valid point. You know what; you're right. Both the (historically incorrect) McCarthy stuff, and the Republican-slamming line are fair game for the movie, because they are both apparently based on events which took place in the lives of the principal characters.

OTOH, before you actually saw this movie, and based on all the trailers and advertising that you saw, did you really guess that they would be covering any political aspects of Julie and Julia's lives?? Tell the truth. The answer of course is no. You thought the movie was a LIGHT-HEARTED COOKING movie, just like everybody else. And the reason you thought that is because they wanted to represent the movie as fun and feel-good, in the hopes of maximizing their revenue. The simple fact is that misrepresentation is a form of dishonesty. Too bad they didn't put that "Republican" line right in the trailer! Then I and 100 million other Americans could've said "I'm not wasting my time on THAT biased piece of trash!"

Also, there is next to no chance that you will ever walk into a movie that is advertised as a fun, feel-good romp, and get blindsided by a condescending line like "If I was a democrat, I would've fired you!". I challenge anyone reading this thread to give me an example of a movie from the last 25 years that does that.

reply

[–] dakotasdad 14 years ago

Do Dems actually employ anyone (other than state and federal workers) to fire?;)

reply

[–] Doghouse-6 14 years ago

Well, we keep hearing that "liberals" run the entertainment industry, so I guess the answer would be, yes, they employ lots of people.

Poe! You are...avenged!

reply

[–] Doghouse-6 14 years ago

If you'll permit, I can offer some sympathy, albeit from the opposite end of the political spectrum. It strikes me that you may be more sensitive to "liberal bias" in the same way that I'm more sensitive to a conservative one, which I often detect in film and television entertainment. I wish I could give you some examples, but the truth is, I find so little of what I see these days memorable that a day or two later, I literally can't recall what I've seen. All that sticks in my mind, from a political standpoint, are the instances of head-shaking and eye-rolling that occur when such messaging, either subliminal or overt, presents itself. So I wonder whether there isn't more "balance" than you're perceiving. Are you truly taking note of content which supports your ideology, or is it only the offending "leftist" viewpoints which stay with you? Is it possible that portrayals which are in line with your beliefs simply don't jump out at you as opposing ones do, and pass by without it ever occurring to you that they may be in any way political?

That said, I'd submit that it isn't the responsibility of film or TV entertainment - or anything in the arts - to provide "balance," political or otherwise. Incidentally, I'd go so far as to say it isn't even the responsibility of news reporting to do so. What passes for balance in that context - on the occasions it is attempted - is merely the-right-says-this, and on the other hand, the-left-says-that. What I want from news is the reporting of fact, not simply the presentation of opposing viewpoints, neither of which may be representative of actual facts in any given instance. I therefore seek out news sources as free of both dueling talking points and what I see as pervasive conservative/corporate slant as I can find.

As to this specific film, I wonder at your choice of it as support for your indictment of "Hollywood's" liberal bias, for a couple of reasons. First, what I took to be its relative neutrality; I don't recall that the positions of Julia's father were presented in a judgmental or ridiculing way, much less as an "attack" on conservative ideology, even in their "McCarthy" context. Julia and Paul were portrayed as being at one end of the political spectrum, her father at the other, with no commentary on them either way by the filmmakers. Also, inasmuch as both McCarthy and his tactics have been roundly discredited by history - from the perspectives of both the left and the right - I wonder at your assumption of it as being a representation of traditional conservative ideology (whether as the subject of an "attack" or not).

As to your last point about directing your capital, I'd remind you that this is the very embodiment of free-market/consumer choice philosophy. The market determines what sells (and in the cases of comedy and commentary, "conservative" seems to sell the latter; "liberal," the former) and the consumer decides where to direct his dollars. But you can also take heart that, when it comes to Hollywood product, those dollars ultimately wind up in the coffers of huge media conglomerates, all of which are run by conservatives (who direct their campaign contributions accordingly), regardless of whichever political viewpoint is being put forth.

Poe! You are...avenged!

reply

[–] dagrattle 14 years ago

Very well said. You covered several things I'd been thinking, and more eloquently than I'd ever have gotten around to.

reply

[–] Doghouse-6 14 years ago

Thanks, dagrattle. Very kind of you to say.

Poe! You are...avenged!

reply

[–] gabby_bm 14 years ago

I'm not an (R) or a (D), but I found the line to be out of place and thrown in as a jab, rather than put in for any real meaning or significance. He could have just as easily said "If this were XYZ Corp. you'd be fired" and it would have been just fine, and better suited. But it was a misplaced, ill-conceived jab at the GOP that had no real place or meaning in the film- not like the McCarthyism which was a real and relevant aspect of the film's history.

I don't need you to tell me how good my coffee is. .

reply

[–] Doghouse-6 14 years ago

I can suggest a different perspective on "the line," if I may.

With complaints of waste, fraud, inefficiency and incompetence, Republicans have long branded themselves as the anti-government party. Julie, taking a (presumably) paid sick day for purely personal reasons, could be seen as a small example of such complaints. Her boss, understanding full well what was really going on, lets her slide; the notion being that only a Democratic bureaucrat would tolerate such behavior. From this viewpoint, the scene reinforces conservative ideas, rather then being a jab at them.

It's all in how you look at it. Is it possible, then, that a scene which could be interpreted either way is taken as a jab at Republicans merely on the basis of a reflexive assumption that "Hollywood" could intend nothing else, putting the bias strictly in the eye of the beholder?

Poe! You are...avenged!

reply

[–] gabby_bm 14 years ago

Good point, Doghouse. I must admit that it crossed my mind that her manager's leniency did not represent the ideology of his bosses/CEO and that he deserved to be fired himself.
But I can only see it as a jab since it was a single throwaway line that served no real purpose, fitting nowhere in the context of things.
Just to demonstrate my sexism, this was a touchy-feely "chick flick". If this scene were in "Boiler Room", "Wall Street 2" or even "Office Space", it might have had a different perspective...for me at least.

I don't need you to tell me how good my coffee is. .

reply

[–] Doghouse-6 14 years ago

...it was a single throwaway line that served no real purpose, fitting nowhere in the context of things

That's pretty much how I viewed it. It reminded me of the kind of lines that Bob Hope movies were peppered with (some character would say something like, "Money is no object," and Hope would reply, "You must be a Democrat."), and it didn't strike me as something that should be taken any more seriously.

After all, politics only serves two real purposes, the first being something to make good-natured fun of. I'll let you know if I ever figure out what the second purpose is (see what I mean about good-natured fun?).

Poe! You are...avenged!

reply

[–] gabby_bm 14 years ago

Thanks for the Bob Hope reference. I'm still smiling at that. Point made, taken and well-received!

I don't need you to tell me how good my coffee is. .

reply

[–] Doghouse-6 14 years ago

If I've made someone smile, my day's been worthwhile (and the rhyme is unintentional; it's far too conventional...there I go again).

Poe! You are...avenged!

reply

[–] ltredinnick 14 years ago

Thank you, Doghouse-6! Your response was very articulate and thoughtful. I find it interesting that the OP has not yet responded...I eagerly await his take on your post.

In vino veritas

reply

[–] Doghouse-6 14 years ago

Thanks, ltredinnick, that's very nice of you. I, too, rather hoped we'd hear more from sportsfan79. I usually enjoy a spirited debate and wouldn't mind kicking the issue around some more. Maybe we will yet.

Poe! You are...avenged!

reply

[–] sportsfan79 14 years ago

Here I am!

It appears that you correctly 'sensed' that I hadn't gone far, and that I was checking back on this thread every few days or so to see if there were interesting comments. I apologize for not replying sooner; I did not have the opportunity to compose a worthwhile response.

So Doghouse, you made two posted replies suitable for discussion, but I will choose one in the interest of time, and reply to the other later. Essentially, your point was:

Her boss, understanding full well what was really going on, lets her slide; the notion being that only a Democratic bureaucrat would tolerate such behavior. From this viewpoint, the scene reinforces conservative ideas, rather then being a jab at them.

This certainly is an alternative viewpoint, and to be fair, there could even be merit to this viewpoint. But my gut tells me that this viewpoint is not what the filmmakers intended. Does this assertion expose my own bias? Possibly, but I maintain that the context of the movie as a whole strongly supports the idea that the intent of the line was to make a dig at Republicans.

Also, in the unlikely event that your alternative explanation was actually true, and the intent of the line was to compliment Republicans, I wouldn't like that either. It simply does not belong in this movie. Consumers who paid to see this movie based on viewing the feel-good, carefree advertising were misled, pure and simple.

reply

[–] Doghouse-6 14 years ago

Well, hello, sportsfan! Nice to "see" you.

You raise some interesting points about context and truth in advertising, as it were. First, I must admit to a bit of "devil's advocacy" regarding a possible alternate interpretation of "the line;" the intent you infer is most likely the accurate one, and it is indeed how I interpreted it. But as I suggested in another post, it seemed as innocuous to me as the political one-liners Bob Hope used to toss off in his films. Your statement that you'd be equally troubled had the line been intended differently adds a new dimension to the issue, which I take to be an objection to being blindsided by any gratuitous injection of one political viewpoint or another.

I guess the answer to that is that many viewers have areas of sensitivity - sex, profanity, gore or whatever it might be (mine happens to be animal cruelty) - and that films (or television) would be bland indeed if attempts were made to eliminate anything that could possibly bother anyone. Perhaps films would need a more specific rating system, like that for television using a letter designation for any potentially offensive element, to warn all viewers of content they may find objectionable. I'd have no complaints about that; I tend not to pay much attention to them anyway, inasmuch as there's no designation currently in use for my particular area of sensitivity. I just have to take my chances.

As to "liberal bias," I'd like to suggest taking a step back and viewing it in a larger context. It's probably generally true that the creative personalities involved in filmmaking tend to lean to the left, politically. Whatever the reasons for it, that's just the way it is; a fact of life. Some people apparently feel that film entertainment suffers for this. It's probably also generally true that leaders of business and industry tend to lean to the right. That's also just the way it is - and a fact of life - and some people feel that society suffers for that. In consideration of your hope for "a day when Hollywood...become[s] a bit more balanced," I'd point out that we rarely, if ever, hear the wish expressed that there should be more "balance" among our captains of industry. There wouldn't be much point, anyhow; within the law, businessmen are free to create, build and run their enterprises (and their politics) as they see fit, and I wonder if we'd truly want it any other way. I can only suggest the adoption of a similar philosophy with regard to filmmakers.

Any dollar spent on film entertainment is "gambled," so to speak. Even if a film contains nothing which offends, we may just plain dislike it. I also know that even if I see a film that I love everything about, and which doesn't offend me in any way, it's purely happenstance, since nobody makes films just to please me, or anyone else, alone. In short, we pays our money and we takes our chances, as someone once said, and films represent one product which never comes with a guarantee. There are always going to be surprises - pleasant or unpleasant - no matter how careful one is, and there isn't any foolproof way to avoid them. Or for filmmakers to avoid offending you, me or someone, somewhere.

Incidentally, you may or may not be aware of a box that can be checked on your profile page which allows the user to be alerted by email of responses to their posts. You might not wish to be bothered, but I find it a very convenient alternative to periodic rechecking of threads.

Poe! You are...avenged!

reply

[–] sportsfan79 14 years ago

It's probably generally true that the creative personalities involved in filmmaking tend to lean to the left, politically. Whatever the reasons for it, that's just the way it is; a fact of life.

You know Doghouse, it's chicken soup for the soul to have you acknowledge the validity my point so clearly and directly. It is such a rare occurrence on internet message boards to have a disagreement where the other party makes any concession of any kind at all. It's also worth noting that just a little bit of validation of your adversary is more powerful than a thousand declarations of "you're an idiot! you don't know what you're talking about! blah, blah, blah".

Also, you made a point I hadn't considered before! The frustration endured by moderates and conservatives toward media and popular culture may be similar to frustration encountered by progressives and liberals toward captains of industry and commerce. Interesting concept!

reply

[–] Doghouse-6 14 years ago

Although we apparently view things from different points of the political spectrum, you certainly never struck me as an "idiot;" your viewpoints are expressed in articulate detail, and worthy of response in kind. It seems to me far more useful to begin with acknowledgment of another's point of view, rather than outright rejection, as a basis for discussion.

Anyway, I always find a reasonable exchange of ideas far more edifying than swapping insults, and I much appreciate encountering others who are both willing and capable of such an exchange. I've been enjoying ours - you're obviously open-minded and intelligent - and I'm always happy to continue on just about any topic. I love batting ideas around and examining opinions, and I often discover as much about my own points of view and my reasons for having them as I do about others'.

Poe! You are...avenged!

reply

[–] bugsboom 14 years ago

when you put it that way Doghouse, it seems to be more of a jab against liberals than conservatives. My reasoning is that the boss is made to appear lazy and uncaring that one of his employees skipped out on work for some b.s. On initial viewing, I said to my boyfriend "ooh, her boss is cool!" but after reading your post and thinking about it, there seems to be a statement against Libs. That a Conservative boss would care more about the bottom line and fire her lazy ass from the job she finds so beneath her, but a Dem. boss would just say "what the hell! let her have a day off!" This whole debate is silly anyways.

I'm here to kick ass and chew gum and I'm all out of gum!

reply

[–] Doghouse-6 14 years ago

Yeah, even if the line was intended as any kind of a dig at so-called conservative ideology, it seemed like an innocuous, throwaway kind of thing. But since the OP's point had to do with a perceived pervasive, anti-conservative bias in domestic film product, I thought that by illustrating that this particular instance could be interpreted in more than one way, it was possible that some other instances, as well, were matters of perception rather than intent.

Poe! You are...avenged!

reply

[–] laverite 14 years ago

Wrong!

Her own political bias was a theme Julie Powell inserted into her blog and her book. Repeatedly.

Likewise, the business about Julia's reaction to her WASP father and his politics AND the chilling effect McCarthy's smear campaign had on the foreign service in general and Paul Child's investigation in particular come from Julia Child's letters and journals.

Both attitudes are essential and true to the characters.

reply

[–] Doghouse-6 14 years ago

Forgive me, laverite, but when these threads get long and stretch across multiple pages, it sometimes gets difficult to tell who's responding to whom. But if I may be allowed to jump in - if that's what I'm doing - I'd suggest in support of either my own points or those of the OP, that what appears in the film deserves be judged entirely on its own, without regard to the written source material, which many viewers may not have read.

Based upon what you say, it sounds as if the filmmakers might well have put an even greater - rather than lesser - emphasis on the political aspects of the characters, as more context may have made the narrative clearer.

Poe! You are...avenged!

reply

[–] laverite 14 years ago

"Based upon what you say, it sounds as if the filmmakers might well have put an even greater - rather than lesser - emphasis on the political aspects of the characters, as more context may have made the narrative clearer. "

Not understanding this conclusion at all.

In writing her adaptation Nora Ephron greatly underrepresented Julie Powell's clearly stated reactions to working for the Republican management of the LMDC. What's more, Ephron displaced the charges leveled by Powell further by writing it in as a single defensive comment from a minor character.

It's all neither here nor there to me but if the original charge is that the film was an exercise in gratuitous Republican bashing by the liberal Hollywood machine it's factually baseless. And that's the point I was making. Both Powell and the Childs (Julia and Paul) expressed their opinions and characterized their experiences. They all leveled specific charges at "the Republicans" and/or Joseph McCarthy and the film reflects that accurately and fairly.

reply

[–] Doghouse-6 14 years ago

My point wasn't that "the film was an exercise in gratuitous Republican bashing by the liberal Hollywood machine," at all, as the OP found. I was observing what you've pretty much confirmed: "Nora Ephron greatly underrepresented Julie Powell's clearly stated reactions to working for the Republican management."

In other words, the film was rather restrained in its presentation of anything political with regard to Julie, or Julia, for that matter. And I was theorizing that if those aspects of the source material were as significant as you suggest, a greater emphasis upon them in the film would have given them more meaning, making them seem less like token jabs at Republicans, as the OP and others interpreted them.

Poe! You are...avenged!

reply

[–] laverite 14 years ago

I guess. ...if it follows that anyone goes to the movies assuming or insisting that everything be dumbed down so as not to offend anyone or if one assumes that a Republican (since the OP made them the topic of this thread) can't feel good if anyone has an opinion about policies that impact directly on them.

Honestly, I'm not comfortable painting Republicans as that thin skinned or humorless. That's too close to buying into that whiney-children-grow-up-to-be-conservatives characterization that's far less flattering than a line or two of movie dialogue. KWIM?

reply

[–] Doghouse-6 14 years ago

"KWIM?" Not really. I'm not trying to "paint" anyone one way or the other. My overall take on the entire issue of politics, as it relates to this film, is that it was represented largely in passing and with minor significance, and it was therefore something of a revelation to me from your posts that the source material put such an emphasis upon it.

Poe! You are...avenged!

reply

[–] sportsfan79 14 years ago

Laverite, I like you. I like Doghouse too, for that matter. As progressives, you might not be thrilled that I own handguns, or oppose big government, but I suspect that if we sat down and talked over a couple of martinis, we'd find plenty of common ground.

That's what our country needs right now - more common ground. In fact, the reason I dislike movie lines like "the republican" jab so much is that all they do is remind me of what divides us, instead of what unites us.

--Sportsfan

reply

[–] Doghouse-6 14 years ago

Make mine a Tanqueray and tonic or Glenlivet on the rocks, and it's a date.

Look at it this way: "the line" at least got several of us talking. It's a start.

Come to think of it, maybe it would benefit the people in DC to watch more movies together. Or perhaps, we should be the people in DC (or do I flatter us?).

EDIT (after some further thoughts on your remarks) -

I'm sure you're right about common ground, and I'd bet that a great deal of nationwide disagreement stems from simple misconceptions - or stereotypes, if you will - harbored by many who hold differing political philosophies. For example, I know it to be true that not all progressives are fans of big government or oppose the Second Amendment, and I'm sure it's equally true that not all conservatives believe government can do nothing right or that evolution or climate change are based on nothing but bogus science. I fear we're often ill-served by our proxy spokespersons (elected representatives or unelected extremists on both sides) who engage in blanket characterizations, thus cementing such nuance-free notions in the public consciousness.

We could no doubt go on for days examining the reasons for this (win-at-any-cost politicians, sound-bite news, governance as spectator sport), but whatever they are, it's clear the only way forward is through the kind of open and respectful exchanges we here on these boards have proven are possible.

Poe! You are...avenged!

reply

[–] sportsfan79 14 years ago

We could no doubt go on for days examining the reasons for this (win-at-any-cost politicians, sound-bite news, governance as spectator sport), but whatever they are, it's clear the only way forward is through the kind of open and respectful exchanges we here on these boards have proven are possible.

I agree wholeheartedly. I often read message boards, and it can be depressing to note the mutual lack of respect folks exhibit based solely on differing ideology. It takes effort, but I need to focus on looking past my immediate visceral (anger) reaction, and seek understanding as my primary goal. It is the only and best antidote for the divisiveness that prevails today.

reply

[–] jeff-1076 11 years ago

That's what I find annoying about the line, it just comes out of nowhere and makes no sense in the context of the scene. Just a cheap jab for no reason other than to be spiteful.

reply

[–] laverite 14 years ago

The fact is, that the Republican "bashing" was a constant theme through Julie Powell's book. She had to deal with the Republicans running the LMDP and that was her unmistakeable and repeated response.

If Nora Ephron picked it up and reflected it in a single line, she was extremely kind to the GOP and brutal in her editing of Powell. OTOH, Ephron was incorrect in attributing it to Powell's boss. In reality it should have been Powell's own dialogue.

reply

[–] sportsfan79 14 years ago

Interesting!

So from what you're saying, it appears that the edit process for the movie included a considerable amount of 'sanitizing', to remove numerous instances of "Republican bashing", which were present in Powell's book. Too bad they missed one! If they would've had the good judgement to remove that one last line, then the movie would've been true to it's feel-good advertising, and I and millions of other people would've enjoyed it a great deal more.

On a related topic, it really does appear that the Julie person is truly an unlikeable character in real life. That's a topic for another thread (and there are several on this board already), but based on her actions she really does appear to be a small person in every sense of the word.

reply

[–] lebeers 14 years ago

No, I am not saying that the film editors edited anything out. I'm saying that in her adaptation of the two books into the movie story Ephron chose not to include Powell's repeated slams at the Republicans who were running the LMDC. Ephron's single remark was mild in comparison to Powell's. Why Ephron chose to give the line to Powell's boss rather than to Powell (which would have been more accurate) I can not say.

reply

[–] sportsfan79 14 years ago

Oh, sorry.

Well then, replace "edit process" in my post with "film adaptation" and my point still stands. Thanks. Also, do you have 2 different screen names?

reply

[–] laverite 14 years ago

I have but one account/screenname but you are correct in thinking that lebeers was also me.

Last night our wireless network went out. I had to borrow my husband's laptop to post closer to where the signal originates. Turns out he also has an IMDb account so I didn't get a prompt to log in in my own name. Oops!

reply

[–] bugsboom 14 years ago

I'm sorry but exactly what about this movie did you find so politically offending? It's a light-hearted comedy about cooking and life. Just from reading your bloated rhetoric so far, you just seem like a paranoid Conservative looking for Republican-bashing at every turn. I'd honestly like to hear your explanation as to how this movie is such a horrible movie based on political reasons. I liked the film. It was cute and it encouraged me to actually READ my mother's copy of Mastering the Art of French Cooking. I fail to see what the hell the problem is from your side.

I'm here to kick ass and chew gum and I'm all out of gum!

reply

[–] sportsfan79 14 years ago

I'm sorry but exactly what about this movie did you find so politically offending?

Are you saying that you read the entire OP and you are still not understanding it? I find that hard to believe... then again, maybe not so hard.

Look, the republican-dig line was out of place in this lighthearted feel-good movie. If you glance through this message board, you will find that many, many, many people of varying ideologies agree that it was unnecessary and off-putting. Perhaps you don't agree, but in reading your post, that may be because you seem very comfortable with republican bashing.

reply

[–] bugsboom 14 years ago

ok, so you're freaking out over one line? i had to rewatch the movie to figure out which one you were talking about. dude, seriously? one line that was an off-handed comment? in a chick flick? you're upset about that and are turning it into some sort of crusade against the "evil liberal media." i don't know whether to laugh at you or cry for you. there are much more important things in this world to worry about than an quasi anti-Republican line in a silly Meryl Streep comedy!

I'm here to kick ass and chew gum and I'm all out of gum!

reply

[–] sportsfan79 14 years ago

ok, so you're freaking out over one line?

No, I'm not "freaking out", I'm making an observation, and welcoming responses.

Your posts are pretty inflammatory. Does it make you feel more validated to blanket characterize opposing viewpoints as 'freaking out'?

there are much more important things in this world to worry about than an quasi anti-Republican line in a silly Meryl Streep comedy!

Absolutely correct. In fact, I said almost exactly this same thing in paragraph 2 of my original post. Did you completely read the original post before flaming?

reply

[–] artisandy 14 years ago

bugsboom~ : >) the solution is simple. it may not work but, it's worth a try:

Petition the Screen Writers Guild to forbid artists to write anything in their scripts that might possibly offend any Republicans or conservatives. Also, if there is even the slightest implication to which any GOP member may take offense, there should be some type of warning so the affected viewer can avoid wasting valuable funds to see or to rent the movie.

Good idea?

We must be aware of the psychological pain inflicted to certain members of the public by careless remarks!

reply

[–] bugsboom 14 years ago

Pray tell, gentlemen, how am I flaming? I'm simply attempting to understand the need to get so bent out of shape over something so small. Also, are you suggesting that offending Conservatives is bad but offending Liberals isn't? Before you accuse me of being some sort of ultra-liberal nut, I'm middle. I neither agree nor disagree with either side wholly. I do, however, feel that such debates as this one are unnecessary in terms of cutesy little chick flicks. That one line is nothing. There are plenty of anti-liberal rhetoric on television every day. I don't see you taking a stance against THAT. We live in an extremely partisan society. There will be insults hurled from both sides. You are obviously a Conservative. I have no choice but to respect your opinions if they are coming from an intellectual point of view. However, to waste your time on the 'Net railing against one line in a film like this is, I'm sorry to say, folly. Go over to the boards for Michael Moore's so-called "documentaries" and talk about how biased and inaccurate his films are. You wouldn't be wrong in your statements there. A message board for a film that's about cooking and Julia Child is no place for such a debate. As for you, artisandy, surely you are joking. I am praying that your comments are facetious in nature and not a serious suggestion (and boy am I praying hard.)

I'm here to kick ass and chew gum and I'm all out of gum!

reply

[–] sportsfan79 14 years ago

Pray tell, gentlemen, how am I flaming?

From your first post: "Just from reading your bloated rhetoric so far, you just seem like a paranoid Conservative...". In my opinion, that's flaming. OTOH, I read some of your post history and you seem to have an 'in your face' writing style. Also, you've sortof calmed down as we've gone along, so no biggie.

I also read some of artisandy's post history. Lots of troll posts. I usually ignore that kind of stuff.

reply

[–] bugsboom 14 years ago

I'm a very "in your face" person. I'm not afraid to speak my mind. Also, there isn't anything I say on the internet that I wouldn't say to someone's face. I'm an adult, not a child, so I'm pretty fearless with my opinions., which is a character fault that my boyfriend is afraid will get me slapped by a stranger one of these days! lol.

Do I ever get offended by Liberal-bashing? Of course! However, over the years, I've just grown up to ignore it. We live in a society where loud-mouth talking heads like Glenn Beck and Rush Limbaugh are elevated to god-like status no matter how uninformed and inflammatory they are. Where Jon Stewart and Stephen Colbert are seen as "serious journalists" and not as what they are: comedians and nothing more. I refuse to listen to some commentator and then parrot their ideas as the gospel truth. I'd much rather make up my own mind about what to believe in terms of politics. Does that mean that we can't make fun of both sides? Hell no! We can still have a sense of humor with politics, be it liberal or conservative. My reasoning for that is simple: politicians can be pretty dumb and are asking to be mocked! Certain ideologies from both Dems and Reps are just plain laughable.

Now, as far as this particular film is concerned, I can't allow myself to get offended over such a throw away line. It's a cute film and not a statement against Conservatives. Now, if you're easily offended, I suggest you NOT read the book most of the movie is based on. The young woman, Julie Powell, is extremely anti-Conservative (and also much bitchier in reality than her "character" in the movie.)

As for the McCarthy stuff, let's be honest here, the man was evil. He knew just what button to push to forward his political career and that button was Communism. If you get people worried that there are Communists living among them, they will eventually turn in their own mothers. People had their careers and entire lives ruined because of McCarthyism. Never mind the fact that the majority of the people accused were never Commies. It was a modern day witch hunt. So if you hear a McCarthy era story from the perspective of an innocent person being investigated... well, you see where I'm going with this. I don't think that little sequence was Republican bashing at all. Lots of people on both sides think McCarthy was plain wrong in his actions. My purpose here is to get you to understand that maybe these two issues you take with the film aren't as serious as you originally thought.

I'm here to kick ass and chew gum and I'm all out of gum!

reply

[–] sportsfan79 14 years ago

Do I ever get offended by Liberal-bashing? Of course! However, over the years, I've just grown up to ignore it.

You seem like a pretty honest person so I'm going to ask you a question and then accept whatever your answer is. If you rented this movie expecting a feel-good cooking movie, and you encountered these same lines except they were directed at liberals or democrats, would it bother you at all? Even a little bit?

Also, can you think of any examples of movies from the last 25 years or so that have little digs toward democrats or liberals built into the script? I'm not talking about obviously politically-motivated movies like An American Carol, etc. I'm talking about your basic feel-good, light-hearted movies. Can you think of any that include small digs at democrats? Honestly, I can't think of one! I challenge any of the fine progressives on this board to give some examples. Heck, maybe I'll even put 'em on my netflix queue!

--Sportsfan

reply

[–] bugsboom 14 years ago

Honestly, if there were digs at Liberals? The particular line you've mentioned? I could care less what side it had been directed at. It just doesn't register on my list of things to care that deeply about. Look at it like this: there are ALWAYS going to be people who disagree or mock your political beliefs. The way to weather the storm on that one is to not let it get to you. If you hear a single line slight directed towards your side in a non-political movie, just brush it off. I honestly have grown up to realize that there will never be a united front in politics, so it's not even worth getting upset if someone makes fun of my ideas. Had McCarthy been a liberal? Well, that would've made me ashamed to have EVER associated myself with that political affiliation!

I'm here to kick ass and chew gum and I'm all out of gum!

reply

[–] artisandy 14 years ago

To Sportsfan~ YOU are the Original Poster! YOU started this! if someone disagrees you say they're "flaming".

For Christ's sake, it's only one line from a lightweight movie!! You must be some pc of work. your family probably has to walk on eggshells around you.

And people don't grow conservative with old age, unless they're prone to senility. i'm old enough to be your mother if you have children at home, and my mind is always open to new ideas. I love learning & trying new things.

you said yourself that you lost your sense of humor as you became more conservative in your "maturity". Still can't understand why your party is so proud of being so closed minded. what's to be proud of?

I've heard plenty of liberal bashing but I'm not the one crying over it like you. Silly.. : >)

reply

[–] sportsfan79 14 years ago

i'm old enough to be your mother if you have children at home, and my mind is always open to new ideas.

If that's true that's pretty sad. Usually people outgrow ad hominem attacks in their 20's and 30's. And I don't need to make a case about "flaming". Your post history in this thread is right out there for anyone to read.

I have an exercise for you. Go back and read my OP and look for personal insults toward liberals, individuals, anyone. Now, go back and read your first post to me. In that short 8 sentence post alone, I learned that conservatives are:

silly
absurd
whiny
given to temper tantrums
goofy
childish
closed-minded

If you truly are open-minded as you claim, and if you are honest with yourself, you will see a difference between our two posts.

reply

[–] artisandy 14 years ago

and those are your good qualities

reply

[–] sportsfan79 14 years ago

and those are your good qualities

HA, that's actually kindof funny.

Well, you may be kidding or you may be serious, but my take on you from your posts is that you genuinely think conservatives are just all wrong, and you're all right, and we are all idiots and rednecks who don't deserve your respect or even basic civility.

Why is it that people who constantly trumpet their "open-mindedness" usually wind up being the most closed-minded of all?

reply

[–] artisandy 14 years ago

maybe there is a little humor left in you.

No i don't stereotype you all as idiots, & certainly don't mean to get personal. My 28-yr old son's a staunch republican & american history scholar, and we still manage to stay very close surprisingly.

I'm actually very pissed at the republicans in congress who are doing nothing but obstructing every last effort of the president, regardless of what's on the agenda, even provisions that'd benefit themselves, done just on principle of their lack of power, and because they represent special interests rather than their constituents.

yes i'm extremely offended when i see these wingnuts carrying signs of Obama as hitler or a monkey or absurd crap like he's a communist, etc because it's all hate. newt gingrich comparing this administration to Nazi germany. christ almighty! wtf is wrong w/them? Not you

In my whole life i've never seen anything like it. Obama's the greatest president we've ever had & I've been around since eisenhower was in office.
He could do wonders if all these congressmen would stop their antagonism. They're against any progress whatsoever.

why? they were paid big bucks to allow the banks become loan sharks. Big Oil companies too. they're all in on it. it's GREED plain & simple. Any type of govt regulation might take a bite out of their payoffs. to me, they're anarchists.

I'm not going to argue although i could say SO much more. I can see that you however, do like to argue, from the number of your posts. I however, absolutely hate to argue.

WHY don't you get on another movie, you said you watch lots of them....or go to the politics board?
WHY sweat the small stuff? WHY such a big deal over NOTHING!!!! it's just a line from a movie....... it's really getting old & boring. AND, so what if people might think you're an idiot or redneck. who cares as long as you know who you are.

The End

reply

[–] sportsfan79 14 years ago

I'm not going to argue although i could say SO much more. I can see that you however, do like to argue, from the number of your posts. I however, absolutely hate to argue...The End

See that's too bad, since this is my favorite post of yours so far. This post is about building understanding between our points of view, whereas your first post on 4/25 was about insulting conservatives and then disappearing.

What we're doing here is not arguing, by the way. If you work to gain understanding about the other side of the discussion, there is always value in that process. It's exactly what our leaders need to be doing, in fact. Take for example my dialogue with Doghouse-6 on pages 2, 3, and 4 of this thread. He seems like a fairly left-leaning liberal, and we started on polar-opposite ends of the argument. But by our last posts on 5/12, we were talking about discussing common ground over cocktails. I seek out opportunities to have that kind of discussion, because it reminds me that liberals and progressives are real people - they're more than just the hateful and malevolent messages that I read all over the internet.

I'm actually very pissed at the republicans in congress who are doing nothing but obstructing every last effort of the president, regardless of what's on the agenda, ... yes i'm extremely offended when i see these wingnuts carrying signs of Obama as hitler or a monkey or absurd crap like he's a communist, etc

This is understandable, but you do recall the Bush presidency, don't you? Remember "the Chimp", "Chimpy", or "Chimp in Chief". I don't think there's ANY comparison between the absolutely VILE treatment of President Bush, and the media red carpet that's been rolled out for Obama. And this despite the fact that Obama has continued and even amplified most of Bush's policies, such as the Patriot Act, No Child Left Behind, Increasing Troup Counts Overseas, and racking up absolutely OBSCENE debts to China to be paid by our children and grandchildren.

In fact, I don't question your honesty, but where are you seeing these photos of Obama as hitler, or a monkey, etc? I haven't noticed them. Perhaps because I don't get over to the liberal websites often. Feel free to link to any if you like, because I would like to see it so I can join in condemning it as a conservative.

Obama's the greatest president we've ever had

Hopefully this was meant to be humorous.

My 28-yr old son's a staunch republican & american history scholar

Sounds like an intelligent, upstanding person and all-around good guy.

reply

[–] sportsfan79 14 years ago

Honestly, if there were digs at Liberals? The particular line you've mentioned? I could care less what side it had been directed at. It just doesn't register on my list of things to care that deeply about.

I said I would accept your answer and I do. I'm glad for you, honestly. I admit that it does bother me, and it is NOT an issue about this particular movie. People are misunderstanding that point. It has nothing to do with just this one movie, it has everything to do with the fact that conservative bashing is everywhere in movies and television. My derision is based on a cumulative effect, not any single movie or TV show.

And as I pointed out earlier, this bias is completely one-sided. I have asked in a couple areas for people to give examples of liberal bashing in apolitical movies, and so far there are none. I am an avid movie watcher, and I can't think of a single one.

Anyway, nice talking to you and have a great holiday.

reply

[–] bugsboom 14 years ago

never mind, artisandy, i just read your other response to the previous poster. you are obviously joking. thank GOD! lol. :-)

I'm here to kick ass and chew gum and I'm all out of gum!

reply

[–] artisandy 14 years ago

better a smart ass than a dumb ass, i always say. Likewise, better to get pissed-off than to get pissed on.

PS I agree with you 100% as do the majority of people in our country.

reply

[–] artisandy 14 years ago

after posting that last one, i worried someone would take it seriously. and i don't consider opposing views as "flaming".

if the OP was only interested in a discussion with those who agree with his political leanings, that just goes w/his ideology in which suggesting changes should be regarded as "opposition".

I'd redirect him to the main boards to discussions under the heading of "Politics". he'll find plenty of supporters.

a nice quote from good ole honest Abe (Abraham Lincoln):
"What is conservatism? Is it not adherence to the old and tried, against the new and untried?"

the word "adherence" is the sticky part, upun my word, or keyword; and it reads "IS IT NOT", not "it is not".

reply

[–] FASAfan 14 years ago

I agree with the OP. My wife watched this movie as I was working on a project outside. Everytime I came into the room, there seemed to be some Republican line being thrown around. Totally out of place, totally obvious.

Republican/Conservative bashing has become a sport. It's fine to bash _them_..._that group_...those _people_; no problem at all! Do as I say, and not as I do!!

Heck, Tina Fey can even make up a line that Sarah Palin NEVER said ("I can see Russia from my house") and everyone in America thinks Sarah a.) said it, and b.) believes it!

What a[n uninformed, soundbite driven] country!!

reply

[–] sportsfan79 14 years ago

Couldn't agree more, FASAfan. Movies, television, internet... conservative bashing is everywhere. That will change on the internet though, as young liberals grow up and become conservatives, which often happens.

P.S. Gotta admit that Tina Fey spoof of Sarah Palin was HILARIOUS, even though I don't like Tina Fey.

reply

[–] bugsboom 14 years ago

Here's the thing: i already thought Sarah Palin was a dumb ass before Tina Fey started spoofing her! That Katie Couric(sp?) interview she did was just a hot mess. I actually felt bad for her! My boyfriend's 10th grade students are more articulate than this woman!

I'm here to kick ass and chew gum and I'm all out of gum!

reply

[–] TristaMD 14 years ago

Conservatives have to put up with liberal media just like atheists have to put up with religious America. Blacks have to put up with predominantly white themes all around them and women have to put up with a particularly male driven society.

It's stupid to sit here and ask for consideration when absolutely no one else is actually given any extra consideration. No one. In our society, nothing is sacred and everything is biased.

That's life.

- Trista

p.s. If I were to write a book, paint a picture, or film a movie - I would pour every ounce of my opinions and life experiences into it, thus making it biased because it was the product of personal opinion. If you don't agree with the overall theme of the movie, turn it off. If you want to finish the movie, then take the social label off your head for a mere 2 hours.

I mean, not sure if people are aware of this or not, but human beings are amazing creatures that can actually rise above and beyond the manufactured labels that society hands out to us in bumper sticker/voting booth form. Amazing, am I right?

Yeah.
Right.

reply

[–] sportsfan79 14 years ago

Conservatives have to put up with liberal media just like atheists have to put up with religious America. Blacks have to put up with predominantly white themes all around them and women have to put up with a particularly male driven society.

This is an interesting way to view it. What I like about your argument is that you are not denying that there is media bias against conservatives. Many folks on your side of the argument try to claim that hollywood is not liberally biased, which of course is preposterous. So, to recap what you're saying: liberal bias in the media is a fact of life which should be tolerated because it's just the way it is. And anyway, many others have to endure bias or prejudice in our society, such as blacks or women.

But to take your analogy a bit further, prejudice or bias against any group is a societal ill, and when we encounter it, we need to work to correct it. My company practices in the traditionally male-dominated industry of engineering. We work very hard to attract and hire qualified female applicants, because we recognize that there is a great deal of talent which would be wasted if we don't welcome women into our employee workforce. So saying that others have to "put up" with bias in our society isn't enough. We have to try to remedy that situation.

In that same way, liberal bias in the media isn't something we need to "put up with". I and many others will fight that bias by directing our resources toward outlets that don't exhibit it. It's free enterprise at work, which is the American way. Its precisely the reason that Fox News has 3 times the viewers of MSNBC, CNBC, etc put together. People are FED UP with that blatant media bias, and they've had enough.

If I were to write a book, paint a picture, or film a movie - I would pour every ounce of my opinions and life experiences into it, thus making it biased because it was the product of personal opinion.

That's excellent, and I wouldn't have it any other way. Just make sure you put some of that in the ADVERTISING for your book or movie, so I can opt not to purchase it if it unfairly attacks my value system. All the progressives seem to be missing this point. Maybe they are missing it intentionally. I and others have no problem whatsoever with the politics in the movie. Our problem is with slipping in political cheap shots in a movie that was advertised as a feel-good movie.

reply

[–] TristaMD 14 years ago

Fair enough.

- Trista

reply

[–] Oblivion14 14 years ago

While I agree that the rather blatant republican bashing in this movie was rather jarring, I do think it has a reason.

While you may be one of those rare conservatives who actually do recognize that there is prejudice, you are a minority. Most republicans like to keep things black and white, in an almost literal sense. Anyone who is not a white heterosexual Christian American male is a lesser human being. While you may say you are working against it, can you honestly say that for the rest of the party? Not a week passes when I don't come across a republican comment on a news article calling Obama a monkey. And I'm pretty sure most conservative-run organizations and corporations are notorious for being xenophobic, chauvinistic, and homophobic. If that's how you guys deal with prejudice, surely you can take a bit of it in return.

You keep tossing around words like 'value system', 'worldview', 'liberal agenda', etc. like you actually believe that somewhere out there there's a cabal of evil liberal masterminds all planning each and every word being said by every person who doesn't think the way that you do.

This insistence on believing that is like an irresistible invitation to make fun of you. Cheap maybe, and in bad taste, but usually none of them catch it anyway since conservatives are notorious for sticking to their own channels of [mis]information. It's almost a game among most liberals because for guys who have no qualms about insulting everyone else, you become oh-so-precious when it comes to your own opinions.

An example is, yes, Fox news. Republicans love to call it unbiased, we know better. So why not admit it's a conservative-pandering network? No network in their right mind may claim to be officially supporting one party, but Fox News is unique in that it's their (solely republican) viewers who claim it to be non-partisan. Weird huh?

Another is the recently sprung up site Conservapedia, the [American] Conservatives' answer to Wikipedia (which they claim has a liberal bias even if it's not exactly American). Conservapedia is rapidly becoming the target of almost every 'netizen' out there not just in America but the world, precisely because it misinforms and is more or less very insulting to anyone who is not the aforementioned white heterosexual Christian American male. Most people I know think it's a joke site in the same vein as Uncyclopedia and Encyclopedia Dramatica because well... the contents are so outrageous it's actually funny.

As for a growing republican presence in the internet... heh. Yes, they already exist. We call them 'trolls', not the /b/ chan kind who do it 'for the lulz' (not sure if you are even familiar with these terms, being conservative) but the kind who actually believe in what they are saying. You can usually find them on the boards arguing for creationism, flinging the 'N' and 'F' words about like it was their god-given privilege, outlining tinfoil hat conspiracy theories about how Obama is an african muslim communist (and yes the last two words are an oxymoron) bent on destroying america for lord knows what reason, how americans should all spend more on nuclear missiles and less on spaceships and medical research, and how marriage is a sacred institution that prominent republican congressmen themselves don't seem to mind breaking over and over in the most public and most hilarious way possible (oh wait did I mention Palin's daughter yet? heh), and how they all seem to be hellbent on preaching American superiority and alienating everyone else on the planet (in a way that is almost eerily similar to islamic theocratic extremism).

So yeah. It's kinda like how Christians nowadays are crying 'foul' on 'Christian-bashing'. As if a few words debunking their favorite beliefs (flat earth, creationism, young earth, geocentrism, everyone else who doesn't believe in jesus is a servant of satan and whatnot) is comparable to the centuries of damage they have done to billions of people (the crusades, slavery, the inquisition, death sentences for crimes ranging from adultery to witchcraft to sodomy to heresy, and yes the McCarthy witchhunts). 'Christian-bashing' hasn't killed anyone, Christian preaching did.

It's like the guy who kept throwing stones at other people crying foul because the other people had the gall to throw stones back at him. Intolerance is a bad thing, but to be tolerant of intolerance is even worse. And if there's one thing Conservatives are good at - it's intolerance.

reply

[–] sportsfan79 14 years ago

Sir or Madam,

With all due respect, I can't justify investing time in a dialog with you, as it will be unproductive. You are too far gone. It is clear that you feel conservatives are evil incarnate, and are responsible for the majority of society's ills. I won't have any success in changing your point of view, so I won't make the attempt.

Just note that in this thread I have been very respectful to liberals, and have been fortunate to have several discussions and 'meet in the middle', so to speak, with a number of moderate and tolerant progressives. You are not one of those people, but fortunately your views are not supported by mainstream America.

And by the way, for every random comment on a message board calling Obama a monkey (still haven't seen any of these, possibly because I don't visit lowbrow websites) I can provide TEN comments calling Bush a chimp, or a nazi, or hitler, etc, etc. You simply CANNOT judge a whole populace based on what the dregs of humanity are saying on craigslist 'rants and raves'. You have to try to rise above it. And if you are truly honest with yourself, you will notice that many progressives behave in the same reprehensible way on message boards, and in far greater numbers than conservatives. This last isn't because conservatives are 'better' in some way, it's simply because most young people are progressives, and for now there are more young people on the internet. This will change over time. In fact, you may be surprised to find that your own attitudes could change with age and experience. I know mine did.

reply

[–] jasonbafa 14 years ago

Why do so many people pigeonhole themselves within one particular ideology anyway? Isn't that a boring life, just constantly saying no, no, no, with your hands over your ears and your eyes closed? Embrace different ideas, not everything you disagree with is evil. It's ok to have differing points of view, and not align yourself wholeheartedly to one particular party or one articulated group of ideas. Be your own person.

reply

[–] Oblivion14 12 years ago

Aren't they though? Islamic extremists are conservatives. Same with ultranationalist fascists and communists. The irony is that they don't recognize that they're cut from the same cloth, dragging everyone else in the world in their endless wars about whose country/tradition/religion is best.

And funny that I'm actually hearing a conservative tell me about not judging a whole populace based on a few people (THAT is actually the most basic philosophy of liberalism) when every single day I hear one of your politicians blame the ills of society on blacks, Mexicans, Muslims, Jews, Europeans, Canadians, the Chinese, gays, feminists, foreigners, and the perennial favorite, communists. Are Republican politicians the dregs of humanity then too?

And there's a difference. Calling Bush a chimp/Hitler/Nazi was because of his role in the Iraq invasion. Calling Obama a Muslim monkey was because he is black. The former was a political criticism. The latter is racism and xenophobia. Seeing you equate the two only proves my point.

But I digress, if you yourself believe what you said about not judging a whole population based on a few bad eggs, then good for you. But don't expect me to believe that that line of thinking is common among conservatives.

reply

[–] sportsfan79 12 years ago

Oblivion, I truly do not intend to insult you personally when I say this, but you are not able to see beyond your own bias on these issues.

Here's an excellent example:

And there's a difference. Calling Bush a chimp/Hitler/Nazi was because of his role in the Iraq invasion. Calling Obama a Muslim monkey was because he is black.

Translation: Vile, incendiary labels are OK for Republicans, but not for Democrats.

To be sure, racism is an ugly occurrence, and should be denounced wherever it is encountered. However, many people are beginning to understand that allegations of racism toward Obama are overblown by many on the left. And, legitimate criticisms of Obama's policies are being mislabeled and dismissed as racist, almost as a form of political strategy. I do believe the public at large is becoming more aware of this phenomenon - called 'playing the race card', and moderate voters are getting weary of it.

Also, the issue of racism aside, I contend that on some level you feel that it's acceptable to use inappropriate language about Bush/Conservatives, because you dislike them so vehemently. That is a form of hypocrisy.

every single day I hear one of your politicians blame the ills of society on blacks, Mexicans, Muslims, Jews, Europeans, Canadians, the Chinese, gays, feminists, foreigners, and the perennial favorite, communists.

You're going to need to link to some of these 'instances' if you expect to have any credibility with regard to this sweeping generalization.

reply