Take a good long look at that sign. Those proportions are correct.
The poster for the “book” reveals what it’s really about. But some slick publicist helped them make the movie look classier, more ambiguous about its true intentions. Make no mistake, this is a hate-fueled piece of propaganda garbage and I get to say so because I’m a blogger. I’m not a critic and I’m not a journalist. But I would never be one of the critics on Rotten Tomatoes for that very reason. I don’t have the audacity to call myself a critic.
Since anyone can call themselves a critic now and get on Rotten Tomatoes I generally regard that website the way I do Yahoo movies and IMDb as a collection of public opinion. It is useful in that way. But it is not, in my opinion, as useful as other aggregate sites that use reviews from major publications to gauge critics consensus. I prefer instead Metacritic, and Movie Review Query Engine mainly because, as I’ve said and gotten said shit for, any any Tom, Dick or Harry Asshole with a blog can get their reviews on Rotten Tomatoes and there doesn’t seem to be any quality checking.
Not to say Metacritic doesn’t have its own faults; for instance, there are many legit critics who aren’t yet on Metacritic and to find their reviews I either have to go to Rotten Tomatoes or else do a Google search. But for the most part they uphold the notion that to be a critic is a high honor and not just anyone can or should be able to call themselves one.
This came crashing down this morning when I happened to check to see how the right-wing propaganda grenade, 2016: Obama’s America, was doing with critics. It’s news because the movie isn’t an embarrassing flop like previous movies spewing out of the right’s cornhole. Generally speaking, left-leaning docs tend to do better because the audiences likely to pay for docs in the first place tend to be left-leaning. You’ll have to figure that one out on your own. Although maybe everybody of every ilk went to see March of the Penguins.
Along with the legit critic reviews, like Stephen Farber and Joe Leydon, up pops one from Avi Offer as an actual legit review from a site called NYC Movie Guru. If you look at the site, it is literally the easiest thing in the world to set up, with no other links about who runs it anywhere to be found — just so-called “reviews.” To me, this isn’t what I would consider a legit critic. So why should I trust his tomato? But to make matters worse, he will now, from this day forward, gain new recognition as the guy who completely fell for 2016: Obama’s America without any sort of objectivity. Perhaps he is a Republican to begin with, in which case his review simply says that he stands behind the racist nonsense therein. Here is his Rotten Tomatoes pull quote (and sure to be blurb on the poster and advertising for the film – believe me, the people behind this doc are very very rich men so marketing is no problem!):
Highly entertaining, eye-opening, scary and enraging. You’ll never look at Obama the same way ever again nor will you trust his empty promises.
Okay, fine, exposing his politics is probably the best compliment he could get here.
This paragraph definitely reveals his own personal bias:
D’Souza travels all the way to Nairobi, Kenya to try to interview Obama’s family, but only manages to get an interview with his step-brother, George Obama, who doesn’t mind that Obama only takes care of him indirectly by taking care of the world, i.e. reducing carbon emissions. His explanation sounds like bulls&*t as though he were hiding his true feelings about Obama, so D’Souza should have asked him more questions or sharper ones. Perhaps George was afraid to speak out against Obama, but that’s something you’ll have to decide for yourself when you watch the interview. At least D’Souza remains calm throughout the interview. He doesn’t resort to raising his voice or annoying/intimidating his interviewees like Michael Moore tends to do.
He blathers on a bit about how the film states, and the “critic” doesn’t disagree with the notion that Obama is reducing NASA’s budget in order to strengthen international relations with the Muslim world:
Philip Ochieng, a good friend of Barack Obama Sr., states many frightening things about Obama Sr. such as his anti-colonialist, socialist ideologies which have now been passed down onto Obama Jr. Case-in-point: Obama has decreased America’s nuclear armament and refused to disarm the nuclear weapons of other countries such as Iran. Moreover, he has weakened NASA and required it to change its primary objective from exploring space to improving its international relations, particularly with the Muslim world.
And then he sticks his landing with his last money shot, including a helpful illustration that says: how many times did I check my watch?
On a purely aesthetic level, co-directors Dinesh D’Souza and John Sullivan, include crisp editing, fast-pacing, lively graphics and even a few moments of comic relief to make for not only an eye-opening, scary and enraging documentary, but also a highly entertaining one to boot. Even if you don’t completely agree with everything stated and argued in the film, you’ll definitely never look at Obama the same way ever again nor will you trust his empty promises.
Are you ready for your closeup, Avi Offer? What did he miss in his review? A lot.
The film was funded by very rich Republicans — the difference between Michael Moore and D’Souza is that Moore didn’t ever, not once, set out to make a propaganda film for any Presidential candidate and did not need personal political contributions to get his film made. D’Souza couldn’t have gone to any studio to get funding — he would have been laughed out of town. But rich folk wanting to see a movie that isn’t necessarily an embarrassment secured its release in order to do what scared Republicans have been doing since the beginning: fan the flames of racism and fear to oust the President.
D’Souza likes to invoke Moore as a way to weasel out of being called a right-wing Propaganda mouthpiece but there is a significant difference between the two. Moore is not a front-man for the money elite, or any elite. He makes films he’s passionate about. D’Saouza’s nonsense furthers a Republican agenda. Full stop. Moreover, Moore has called out Obama in his last film, Capitalism a Love Story, something you will never see D’Sauza do to the Right.
Finally, what is there to say when even the smarter people in the Republican party can smell a rat and this critic can’t. From the NY Times:
Some of Mr. D’Souza’s theories have been widely criticized by prominent conservative and Republican Party leaders. The columnist George F. Will urged Republicans to “recoil” from such views, and wrote last year: “To the notion that Obama has a Kenyan, anticolonial worldview, the sensible response is: If only.”
If Mr. Offer had, in any way, done what Joe Leydon did, for instance, write a fair review that acknowledges what right-wing money can buy, good production value, while also calling out the film for what it really is, I would not have to call him out:
For the bulk of its running time, the pic comes off as a cavalcade of conspiracy theories, psycho-politico conjectures and incendiary labeling — “breathtakingly anti-America” is only one of the epithets tossed about like so much confetti — as D’Souza and assorted interviewees question Obama’s patriotism, deny his support of Israel, decry his Big Government programs, and generally recycle claims, charges and dire warnings D’Souza (and others) have previously promulgated in books, lectures, op-ed screeds and various Fox News guest appearances.
To his credit, D’Souza pointedly avoids the extremes of birther fanatics — early on, he announces Obama was born in Honolulu, and that’s that.
As such, as one of the critics on the tomato-meter, this goes beyond “hey, it’s just his opinion, man.”
Stephen Farber nails it to the wall as well:
The film really goes off the rails in the last half hour, when it veers from biographical data to speculation on how Barack Obama Sr.’s anti-colonialist sentiments turned his son into a radical who aims to dismantle America’s traditional values. To prove his tendentious point, D’Souza trots out a familiar cast of characters. Frank Marshall Davis, a friend of Obama’s grandfather in Hawaii, was indeed a card-carrying member of the Communist Party, though the film fails to mention that when Davis joined the Party in the 1940s, such membership was perfectly legal. We hear about “Obama’s Chicago pal” Bill Ayers, though D’Souza admits that Obama met Ayers in 1995, 25 years after Ayers’ involvement with the Weather Underground. D’Souza also points out that Obama took a class at Columbia taught by Edward Said, the renowned pro-Palestinian scholar. Do any of these marginal associations prove that Obama aims to introduce socialism to America and undermine the state of Israel?
Other bits of “evidence” are just as obviously cherry-picked. The filmmakers show Obama fumbling when trying to explain his healthcare bill at a rally, but they mute the sound of the hecklers who clearly contributed to the President’s disorientation. D’Souza implies that Obama is sympathetic to radical jihadists while ignoring the killing of Osama bin Laden.
The film concludes by suggesting that if Obama wins a second term, America will be a completely different country by 2016. And it ends with the ominous words, “The future is in your hands.” No one doubts that the country faces major challenges in the next four years, but there is one safe bet: The future is unlikely to be affected by this simplistic documentary.
We are living in a time when our Presidential election is about to be bought legally and sold in plain sight. Thanks to the Citizens United decision, you now have men being able to throw their billions around to fund all manner of media propaganda. Perhaps, in a way, this has always been so. But we need our journalists to be able to see through that greased up mask, or we are truly lost.
Most repulsive of all is how the filmmakers have dragged Schindler’s List in their shit trail, stinking it up, borrowing its credibility:
Obama is just as many predicted: George Bush on steroids
Obama has expanded the wars, he has NOT revoked the Patriot Act, TSA has increrased its audacity, the bankers are still looting this country.
No. This isn;’t about “left and right” – a flase paradigm. It’s about getting the crooks out of our country.
“Go lay a wreath on the ocean if you’re still grieving for Bin Laden. I don’t know what else to say about it. Stunned to hear that it’s a sore point in Spain, seriously.”
Somehow methinks if Bush were in office when OBL was captured, Obama’s supporters would be singing a different tune.
Ryan Adams…it is wonderful to read the writings of someone who can plainly see the GOP gameplan. I am glad I found you. I would like to bring to your attention a book written by Robert Altemeyer, a retired professor of psychology who has scientifically studied the right wing and evangelicals since 1966. John Dean used Mr. Altemeyers work when writing his book “Conservatives Without Conscience”. Altemeyer is shouting a warning about what would happen to our democracy if the right, as it existed today took over our nation. His book will explain why and how they think the way they do, and you will understand their mind set. He has made his book available FREE ONLINE. Please check it out, it is frightening.
Theauthoritarians.com
“Go lay a wreath on the ocean if you’re still grieving for Bin Laden. I don’t know what else to say about it. Stunned to hear that it’s a sore point in Spain, seriously.”
Hahahahaha, I SERIOUSLY LOVE YOU RYAN!
Wow, so many liberals lack even the slightest bit of self awareness.
You are complaining about propaganda, character assassination and race baiting when LIBERALS employ all three as their bread and butter 24/7?
Honestly, for once… try to see it from the perspective of non-liberals.
Hollywood is openly controlled by liberals. Liberal viewpoints have been center-stage for decades and you simply can’t abide this little documentary that opened with no major studio support and only 1/12th the
number of screens as Fahrenheit 9/11?
How about Bill Maher’s documentaries where he pretends to be anything but a flaming liberal?
You know what, Obama is going to lose to a weak candidate in November and it won’t be because of him. It will be the ill will that Liberals have brought on themselves with all the bile they spill at the rest of us.
“Of course if he governed as a centrist, I wonder if he could be outflanked on the right by a Tea Party Candidate during the 2016 Primary season.”
He’s not brave enough to govern as a centrist; he’s probably crapping himself over who’s a heartbeat away. (from the NYT):
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/08/27/opinion/paul-ryans-social-extremism.html?nl=todaysheadlines&emc=edit_th_20120827&pagewanted=print
Starting an adoption agency for those adorable new expats called “Who’s Yer Daddy, inc.” Only requirements are you need to like maple syrup and BC bud; cross-border shopping encouraged when the US dollar falls into the toilet.
I have to admit, part of me, a very imaginary part, wants Romney to win this fall, just to see if it all went to shit as badly as I think it would. I would also want to see if Romney would be a slave to the far right or if he would be a centrist which I’m pretty sure he is.
Since I don’t think he really cares about the country (well, not as much as he cares about winning) I suspect he would be a slave to the far right just because he thinks it will increase his chances to win a second time.
Of course if he governed as a centrist, I wonder if he could be outflanked on the right by a Tea Party Candidate during the 2016 Primary season.
The Politics Junkie in me wants to know these things.
Then we’d better start cuddling up to Julian the Emperor so he can help us find a place to stay in Europe. Then we can watch Romney drive America to Right-Wing Hell from the safe vantage of Denmark. Bring all your hoarded food stamps. I believe many of the residential hotels in Copenhagen encourage American welfare expats to trade unused foodstamp vouchers for weed and buttsex
from the résumé of Dinesh D’Souza
“If you want the bad cop, Romney will plunge the US economy (and world economy) into another endless war, this time with Iran. Obama (the good cop) won’t.”
I’m not so sure of your belief, but I will say this about Romney, he will try to privatize whatever he can from the TSA, to the Department of Commerce, the CBO, whatever gets government support, you can bet he’s going to close it down or privatize it. He’s already promised to cut PBS and Amtrak.
Jesus, I know you are thinking in terns of Big Picture, raising the alarm about the Monstrous Machine that’s been set in motion for decades, too huge for anybody to effectively fight — and believe me I’m familiar with diving down that rabbit hole.
But SallyinChicago names two things of enormous consequence. You might not care about Amtrak or PBS. (why should you?) But those things are important to any sane American. We have to fight to save these precious hard-won things or else we truly lose any firm foundation where we can stand.
I usually vote Green Party unless I believe the election is going to be close. Living in Pennsylvania it’s usually safely Democratic, but the Congressional District is a different matter (I got gerrymandered again this past census, so I am not sure what’s up) But in the 1990’s I was in a very competitive Congressional District, in 1996 the winner was decided by less than 10 votes.
But Jesus is on to something. IF all the people who chose not to vote registered and voted third party, and it really doesn’t matter which third party, the two major parties wouldn’t take the current system for granted as they most definitely do.
Want to change things for real in the USA?
When given the choice between Obama and Romney… VOTE FOR ANOTHER CANDIDATE.
Want to change things for real in the USA?
When given the choice between Obama and Romney… VOTE FOR ANOTHER CANDIDATE.
You’ll have to convince 50 million American voters to do that, Jesus. I can try, just to test your theory. But pretty sure I would be better off voting for a person who has remote chance in hell of winning.
By the way, Whom do you have in mind? Because I look around, and I don’t see anybody. Gandhi and Churchill, they’re dead.
Sorry. That’s really cute idea. Adorable.
Vote for the Libertarian dude! Is that the suggestion? Might as well wipe my ass with my ballot. You really don’t understand the system. A vote for a 3rd party candidate is the same thing as giving your vote away to the candidate you fear the most. Why can’t you see that?
There are two guys. I will vote for the better one. It’s that simple.
Let me summarize it in a way anyone can really understand it…
“Don’t underestimate the intelligence, cleverness, and skills of those ruling us”.
Meaning… there’s no way out of this closed system.
Absolutely no way. I know these people first-hand. The only way out is, moving to a not really developed country, that is not much populated, with a western-like morals and way of life (to some extent) and in which you can easily and actively switch from this oil-based global echonomy to some own natural resources one. Of course, a country that doesn’t need central heating, for the matter.
I am looking already for job in countries like Guyana, Surinam, Costa Rica, French Guyana, Belize, some Caribbean islands, thinking also in New Guinea or French Polinesia. Among others. In no way I want to stay in Europe, given the tsunami is approaching at high speed (things can turn really ugly this next month in September, I don’t think than later than Spring 2013) It’s a repetition of the 30’s of the XXth century, only this time is going to be bigger ’cause the situation is bigger in scope and needs.
You can call me paranoid or loonie, I don’t give a… well, you know. I hope, really hope I’m wrong. But also I am a guy that studied this situation since more than 15 years ago, at University level and as soon as in 1997 found plenty of people calling the inminent “War on Terror” that started in 2001. Maybe I have been reading the right sources, after all, or in the right circle and with right contacts (people working for UN, for example).
As I say, feel free to think Obama is “different” in more ways than just “fashion” and a more friendly attitude. The core, the rotten core, is exactly the same. He owes the same powers than Romney does. The same ones than the Clintons, than the Bushes, and so on. The same ones than Rajoy here in Spain, and Zapatero before (gay marriage or not).
Feel free to laugh at me. How the world actually works, doesn’t change. The guys at the new broadcasts are telling you what they’ve been told to. Check out who controls your media, how many corporations do it, to which banks and lobbies do they belong or pay respect. You’ll understand it better, then.
I can tell you, NOBODY is given power unless corruptable.
Incidentally Ryan,
Below is further evidence that Conservative annoyance with people like D’Souza is not all that hidden.
A good column by George Will.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2011/03/04/AR2011030404613.html?nav=hcmoduletmv
General Odom, head of the NSA under Reagan, and Lawrence Korb, Assistant Secretary of Defense for Ronald Reagan provide good Conservative Analysis of foreign affairs. Though Odom has now passed.
Bruce Bartlett, Senior Economic Adviser to Ronald Reagan, provides good Conservative domestic analysis.
Ryan:
I suppose its a fair point that Conservatives have been marginalized by the current Republican Party. They have been marginalized by people who call themselves Conservatives and are nothing of the sort.
I believe that is changing. Certainly the current crop of Republicans deserve to have Obama for 2 terms. I, most certainly, do not.
You cannot support Ronald Reagan and George W. Bush and remain intellectually consistent. In order to support
There is quite a long list of Reagan administration officials who have no use for the current Republican Party or people like D’Souza.
While I note that D’Souza was in the Reagan administration, there was neocon infestation during the Reagan administration. It was tolerated because they supported a tough stance against the Soviet Union — albeit for very different reasons from Reagan.
It was a mistake to allow these people into the Republican Party, but Reagan never allowed them to run wild.
General William Odom, head of the NSA under Ronald Reagan
All due respect Dinesh D’Souza doesn’t represent a Conservative viewpoint.
I don’t think you can call neocons like D’Souza right-wingers either. Their fore-fathers resided in the Lyndon Johnson administration.
There is a good Conservative analysis of him here:
http://www.theamericanconservative.com/larison/obama-anticolonial-hegemonist/
SteveJ, Great article.
One question. Where in America are conservatives like this American Conservative writer hiding?
the consensus impression of D’Souza is that he’s “affiliated with a number of top conservative organizations and publications” — we have that impression because he is.
Rasmussen is merely the in-house polling folks of Faux News. I would trust Matt Sludge before a Rasmussen poll. Obama is up by 9 in PA, despite the voter suppression efforts Gov. Corbett and the tea bagger GOP are doing right now.
And it’s articles like this that make Kris Tapley’s “In Contention” the best awards show blog around.
“it is going to be so much fun watching the crap spewing from your corn hole after November”
Classy!
Actually, I’ll be watching movies then and don’t expect any such reactions until Les Mis.
DNesh D’Souza has been denounced as a moron by life-long conservatives with brains. Nuff said.
TimX:
I actually believe Mitt Romney is somewhat “dim-witted” (you are more than welcome to come up with a synonym that fits him better).
No, he is not “dim-witted” in the sense, that he doesn’t know how to handle his own finances and running his shady businesses (and screw any good sense of solidarity while at it) or isn’t capable of coming off as a schmuck bastard in most everything he does. His education, as well.
But… if you followed his recent tour of Europe (that brought him to London, Poland and Israel, which is a part of Europe these days, apparently) he not only demonstrated a complete lack of knowledge about international politics and state-to-state relations, he also blessed us with a world-class demonstration of a truly remarkable insensitivity to his hosts (in the case of London).
When he tried to come off as an academic, he truly missed the point, what with his inopportune allusion to the work of Jared Diamond. I have read Diamond, and I can assure you that Mr. Diamond would NEVER in a million years approve of Romney’s amateurish interpretation. His “interpretation” of the Palestinian standard of living compared with the Israeli one was an ignorant and downright malignant denigration of the Palestinian people, that are a de facto stateless people. Shameful.
So, no, Romney isn’t “dim-witted” when compared to most of us, he is only “dim-witted” in a political (and academic) sense. That was what I meant and I stand by that. If he hadn’t already proved the point previously, his European tour was the nail in the coffin. An eye-opener, you might say, for everyone who assumes that a man who is going to run for president in the worlds’ most powerful nation is worthy of taking office.
I would like to draw attention to something Adam Gopnik wrote in The New Yorker recently. He had this to say on Romney, which I think is a very fair summation:
“It’s unfair to say, as some might, that Mitt Romney believes in nothing except his own ambition. He believes, with shining certainty, in his own success, and, more broadly, in the American Gospel of Wealth that lies behind it: the idea that rich people got rich by being good, that the riches are a sign of their virtue, and that they should therefore be allowed to rule.”
I wouldn’t trust this man to “run” a country, if my life depended on it. Being president in a democracy is no where near the same thing as being a CEO. That many (not least Romney himself) seem to think that, is a clear indication that our conception of what constitutes a healthy democracy and a healthy state apparatus is in danger of being neglected and abolished.
I was busy cashing all of my welfare checks today so I wasn’t here to help you out, Ryan and friends. But it seems like you did fine without me.
I will add to one point, though. People always like to talk about fraud and waste in government programs. If you look at the percentages of waste in government programs, it’s really quite low. But people do forget there’s fraud and waste in private industry as well. I have no idea which one is worse.
But I’m pretty sure that if we put our minds to it, we could eliminate that fraud and waste pretty easily. If they can do it in business why not the government?
It’s a specious argument and when I see people bring it up anecdotally I pretty much dismiss it out of hand, as should everyone else.
Now that that’s settled, I need to go to McDonald’s and use up my food stamps before they expire. Anyone want some fries?
“Seems that you just pissed that Romney is getting noticed and according to Rasmussen’s latest poll, Romney has it over Obama by a good 3 to 5 points, well above the plus or minus set. He is 8 points above Obama in Florida, 13 points above Obama in Wisconsin and 7 points above Obama in Ohio and climbing.”
Huh? Are you just making up these numbers off the top of your head? The most recent polls show Obama has a lead in critical swing states such as Ohio, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin. In fact, his lead in Ohio has increased slightly, now giving him about a 70% chance of winning the state in November, according to Nate Silver, one of the most respected numbers-crunchers in the business. His projections were deadly accurate in the 2008 election. And you can’t point to one poll and shout, “See! See!” What’s more accurate are the results from a composite of polls computed over weeks and months, and those polls, again, have shown Obama with a narrow lead in swing states such as Ohio, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin.
The most recent CNN poll shows Obama has opened up a nine point lead over Mittens among registered voters nationwide, 52-43%. This is only one poll so I take that percentage with a grain of salt, but the composite of national polls over time has also shown Obama with a narrow but steady lead over Mittens.
“BTW, since you’re a socialist/communist, that makes you a nazi…just in case you didn’t already know.”
You know what they say. Once you bring up Hitler or accuse someone of being a Nazi, you’ve already lost the argument.
LOL Ryan got called a nazi. This place is wacky.
*gives Simon LeBear a b12 shot*
They refused and that is why the US Supremes stepped in and shut it down.
Ryan Adams said:
Bad bad, Medicare Clinic, you behave so badly!
Help us, Private Insurers! You’re our only hope
—————
What are you, 10 years old? And that’s medicaid, not medicare clinic. If a doctor at a regular (real) clinic tried this same level of fraud, he’d be put UNDER the jail (an actual quote by one of our other doctor customers). You can look at every government controlled “business”, and the common characteristic is inefficiency. This it real-world stuff, happening on the ground, not some lofty leftist theory about utopian delusions. You live in a fantasy world.
BTW, since you’re a socialist/communist, that makes you a nazi…just in case you didn’t already know. Why don’t you move to a country where there’s already your type of “utopia” such as Cuba, North Korea, Venezuela, and China. You’ll love it there, I promise.
oh I get it, UNDER the Jail. As in Buried UNDER it. That’s really funny. Your doctor friends are funny! Tell us another funny thing your doctor friend said!
Seems that you just pissed that Romney is getting noticed and according to Rasmussen’s latest poll, Romney has it over Obama by a good 3 to 5 points, well above the plus or minus set. He is 8 points above Obama in Florida, 13 points above Obama in Wisconsin and 7 points above Obama in Ohio and climbing. Sure you can use the biased Quinnipiac poll, but instead of using actual registered votes like Rasmussen does, Quinnipiac is set up to show 50% Democrat and left wingers-42% Republicans-and 8% indy voters and others…so any result from Quinnipiac is skewed from the start in favor of the left wing. And you had better recheck your “facts” as Romney has 48% of the Women vote-22% of the Black vote and 43% of the Hispanic vote according to none other then the Washington Post. Unless he claims martial law or cancels the elections, there is no way in hell he can get re-elected without stealing the election like Al Gore tried to do when he wanted to cherry pick specific Democrat friendly counties in Florida and the Florida Supreme Court ignored repeated warnings from the 11th US District Court in Atlanta to stop trying to change the rules of the election and then use the new rules to overturn or rig an election. They refused and that is why the US Supremes stepped in and shut it down. This was found by no less then the ACLU/NAACP/Federal Civil Rights Office/US DOJ and the US Elections Commission as well as the whole blamed media with the NY Times leading the way. They still found that no matter how they counted the votes, Bush STILL won by over 100,000 votes.
So keep whining, it is going to be so much fun watching the crap spewing from your corn hole after November, and I will be back with a big “Told ya so morons!”
Rasmussen, Rasmussen… what’s that we read about Rasmussen polls lately?
Keep clinging to those Rasmussen polls. Your hilarious false sense of confidence makes your hubris a little less tragic.
Romney has 43% of the Hispanic vote according to none other then the Washington Post.
Link or it didn’t happen. No evidence of those numbers anywhere.
you had better recheck your “facts” as Romney has 48% of the Women vote
Seems that you just pissed that Romney is getting noticed and according to Rasmussen’s latest poll, Romney has it over Obama by a good 3 to 5 points, well above the plus or minus set. He is 8 points above Obama in Florida, 13 points above Obama in Wisconsin and 7 points above Obama in Ohio and climbing.
check again.
I’ve always found it difficult to respect any group, political or otherwise, that considers me as a sub-species. Countering with a slam like “moron” seems pretty tame and benign in comparison.
I can understand the urge to make a considerable effort to make Obama’s presidency look like the the Second Coming, because if you consider the alternative (that dimwitted goon called Mitt Romney), it is tempting to resort to propaganda in favor of the better candidate.–Speaking of “propaganda”, the “dim-witted goon” was Valedictorian of his Class at BYU and one of the few people ever to earn simultaneous graduate degrees at Harvard. His JD at Harvard Law and his MBA at the Harvard Business school where he was a top 5% scholar. Leftists routinely fall back on childish and immature name-calling, but in this case calling Romney dim-witted is an obviously ignorant slur and reflects the bankrupt mentality of the person making the charge. You can disagree with his policies or his ideology, but if you have to resort to juvenile name-calling, you must not have very much on him.
I like how this article exposes the author’s intellectual bigotry. Any critic who gives a positive review about this doc is deemed inferior, and racist to boot. Did you even watch the doc Sasha?
I get it. The Left is desperate. And the closer we get to November, it is looking like President Obama could get landslided. That’s all an assumption. But what I don’t quite understand is how you can wail to the heavens about this film, yet defend Moore’s films. Its all propaganda (whether positive or negative).
And Mr. Adams, you only have friends on the Left? How diverse.
No regrets. I only have friends who don’t drown kittens too.
I hang around with people whom I trust. I don’t hang around with people who support a party that denigrates my lifestyle.
There are moderate conservatives on the site here, and I like to think of them of as friends. (no idea what they think of me). But living in a deep red state I’m surrounded by the most repulsive representatives of the GOP — and that includes a few members of my own family.
My friends are my refuge and we’re a tight-knit diverse rainbow coalition.
Try to spot a person of color at a Romney rally. It’s harder than Finding Waldo. How about you show me all the black people in Romney political ads on TV. But yeah, Determined. It’s me who’s got a problem with diversity.
Are you serious right now??? Hate Filled propaganda huh??? Wow…i didnt think this site was that liberal, i was hoping more moderate, atleast a bit open minded….
There’s a lot more fraud and inefficiency in Medicaid than in Medicare. Many of the excess tests ordered for Medicare are to avoid malpractice lawsuits. I used to work as a computer programmer/support/trainer. One of the medical clinics we had as a customer was in a poor, black area and catered almost entirely to Medicaid (“welfare”) patients…which made it a Medicaid mill. We were privy to their data, saw the clinic’s activities in person, and talked to some of the staff. Clinics like this order tests and procedures that are not needed and in quantities that are impossible for the available staff to actually physically handle (in other words, they were being paid for many things not done). Even though the clinic had a very large staff, (and an onsite pharmacy where even more fraud was happening), there was only one doctor in the clinic. On top of that, most of his staff were low paid, and unqualified to do the jobs they had. This scumbag was getting rich on all of this fraud. Big government controlled bureaucratic agencies simply do not work as well as when the free market in included, and where competition can wring out some of the inefficiencies. Reading the comments on the board, it occurs to me that many of you need to read a book on Econ 101 (micro, NOT macro).
Corporations will fix everything! That’s why nothing would ever get done at the Pentagon without Halliburton and Blackwater.
Bad bad, Medicare Clinic, you behave so badly!
Help us, Private Insurers! You’re our only hope!
“But why do people in Canada come to the US for certain procedures.”
Ah, yes – love those arguments. Speaking from experience, two issues, one serious enough to impede my ability to work and the other an annoyance (neither life-threatening).
The former was dealt with immediately and efficiently – no waits and treatment began on the day I reported it and I fully recovered within a couple of weeks. The other, I waited 6 months for treatment, then it was taken care of. I’m still around.
The reason there are waiting periods in our system is that everybody is covered and urgent situations are dealt with first. There are no waits in the US because 3/4 of the population is not covered and many of those languish at home, untreated, because they can’t afford it.
Seems to me a more practical use of taxes than invading other countries.
The PR machine to privatize up here is nothing but a grab by medical and pharmaceutical giants to gain control of the industry.
There is a very easy way to save Medicare and it’s been on the table and it’s been rejected by Republicans and right-leaning Democrats. I’ll get the solution in a moment. But I need to point out the flaws in the Ryan/Romney plan.
In ten years they want to start issuing vouchers. At first, the voouchers should be a good substitute for Medicare. People will be able to purchase roughly equivalent private insurance for the amount of the voucher. But the problem is that the worth of the vouchers will increase at a slower rate than private health insurance is expected to increase. So each year seniors will have to pay more and more out of pocket to get the same coverage.
And just to be clear, under one Ryan plan, Medicare was abolished. You see, if you were under a certain age cutoff, the only option would have been private health insurers. “Medicare” would have been the name of the government program still, but it would just have been an office of automatons distributing vouchers.
OK, now that we have that settled there are lots of ways to save Medicare. The easiest would be to no longer let it be an entitlement but turning it into a means-tested program (like Welfare or Food Stamps of days past.) – People with high incomes would not be eligible.
Second you could increase age eligibility. This is not a good solution because, let’s face it, people aged 65 to 70 are more likely to put money into the system than to draw from it.
Other solutions (some of these I actually like) would be to alter the way doctors get paid. Now Medicare (and almost all private insurance plans) pay doctors on a fee-per-service. So they get a payment with every service they provide and every test they order. Now payments are restricted by complext guidelines on what services are allowed in certain situations. But even with these regulations, excess tests are ordered.
In many other countries with more efficient systems this fee-for-service model is not used. Instead doctors are payed a flat rate per patient they have, and many are even just payed a flat rate. The way this system cuts costs is that fewer tests are ordered. Offhand I don’t know how much money this simple change would save, but the numbers I’ve seen are quite extraordinary. Other changes would still be needed, but this one change would extend the life of Medicare for years.
But the best way to save Medicare, the one I am referring to at the beginning of the post, is to have Medicare be a public option for people under the age of 65. Yes, if we were to allow people under 65 to buy into Medicare, Medicare could easily be saved.
Look at the facts. Almost everyone under 65 has private health insurance, well except those on Medicaid or those who have no insurance at all. These private health insurers make a ton of profits. And they have a shit ton of overhead. Last I heard, Medicare has overhead of about 6% of costs while private insurers have overhead approaching 20% (this number is mandate now under the Affordable Care Act.
So If private companies who provided insurance for their workers could purchase Medicare for their workers at the same rate they pay for private insurance, all of those profits could go to save Medicare for those above age 65. Medicare could even charge less than private health insurers since they are much more efficient and are non-profit (not to mention that don’t have to pay exorbitant executive salaries.)
The truth is simple, but there’s no political will to do this since private health insurers spend a lot of effort to lobby politicians.
Now I still think this is a bad solution and there is a better one overall, and that’s to go to a single payer system. This has the huge benefit of freeing industry from having to purchase health insurance for their workers. In exchange they would have to pay higher taxes. But this would be a welcome trade-off for industry because the tax rate is more stable than insurance rates.
This is pretty much how most industrialized countries do health care. And they do it more cheaply and with better outcomes.
And before anyone counters “But why do people in Canada come to the US for certain procedures.” The obvious answer is that we do them. And we don’t have to stop. People should still be able to purchase health care insurance above and beyond what Medicare would provide if they so choose. These “elite” plans don’t have to be eliminated.
I type all this out not to advocate for single payer health insurance just to point out how our political system is failing us. The Republicans are failing us tremendously, but, let’s be honest, the Democrats are not far behind.
Every expert in health care policy knows the solution, but the politicians simply aren’t listening to the experts.
And just to be clear, under one Ryan plan, Medicare was abolished. You see, if you were under a certain age cutoff, the only option would have been private health insurers. “Medicare” would have been the name of the government program still, but it would just have been an office of automatons distributing vouchers.
Thank you. I’m so tired of people denying that Paul Ryan wanted to change everything about health care except the name.
@Ryan…you just lost all argumentative credibility with this “do you only rely on Steve Doocy, Sean Hannity, and Rush Limbaugh to feed you your ‘facts’?”
You obviously didn’t read the entirety of my post(s), which means you’re just seeing/reading what you want to. Either that or you have real difficulty in addressing anything or anyone outside of a strictly right/left paradigm.
The very fact that I’m frustrated with Guantanamo not being closed is an automatic clue that I’m not a Republican. I detest Hannity, Limbaugh, and those like them. Take off the blinders. Not everyone is a Democrat OR a Republican.
p.s. You’re right about Google, I should’ve fact-checked, just like you should READ.
tonyr — I shouldn’t have assumed. But frankly there’s not much in your previous comments to indicate you’re an Independent or… whatever the name of Gary Johnson’s party might be.
Surely you’re not saying that Republicans never bring up the Guantanamo issue. They do. All the time. Trying to point to “promises Obama didn’t keep” — as if he’s a bad prevaricating boyfriend we should dump.
I’m not happy about the marijuana situation either. However, I understand that presidents often save the more controversial initiatives for their second term. There’s a little matter of getting re-elected to worry about. So do you go out of your way to freak out the seniors? Do you court the stoner vote, or hold off on that for year #5?
I’d rather NOT have marijuana as a distraction from more serious issues right now. Do you? Is that really a key issue for you? A deal-breaker? Yikes, let’s have a debate about legalizing pot in September. I’m sure the GOP would love that.
Gary Johnson? I’ll google him sometime. But I’m sure not going to throw my money and vote away on him. Nader cost Gore Florida. 3rd party nobodies are always a disaster. No thanks. Gary Johnson, wow wow. That’s realistic.
Sorry again about the Fox and Friends jab. That was uncalled for.
I’ll know where your sympathies lie from now on. Or.. really, sorry, but I’m still not sure what you’re saying. Ditch Obama out of frustration, and allow Romney to slip in? — In hopes that Mitt might come out as a pot-smoker “on day one”? Again, I try to be more pragmatic than that.
So. Are you voting for Gary Johnson then? How will you do that exactly? Write-in vote? That’s adorable.
Ryan: The neocons were fed by an ideology that wasn’t just about draining social programs or feeding their own “war profiteers”, though (that might have been an added bonus, of course). I would argue that the war in Iraq was very much based on the (naive, and stupid) assumption that the US could be “a light upon the nations”, that the way to secure American interests and promote democratic core values was secured by bombing and removing certain despots (why that did not include the Saudis is, of course, a typical case of American hypocrisy). I also think the neocons were working in accord with Israel (or their perceived notion of what Israel is about and what interests suit Israelis best). That was part of their, frankly, creepy messianism (supported by the so-called Israeli Lobby in Washington).
I greatly admire someone like Christopher Hitchens, a multitalented polyhistor, and one of the most gifted essayists of the last 50 years or so (Joan Didion excluded, she is in a class of her own, but for very different reasons), but on Iraq and the neocons he was very, very wrong. But it proves to me, the virulence of the written word, for one. Because even on the Iraq war Hitchens wrote some brilliant articles (though most of them deserve to be thrown into the dustbin of history). It also shows us that even brilliant, complex and diverse minds are capable of being lead astray. Oh well, a digression.
For the sake of it: The Danish Defense Dept. takes up 1,3% of the state budget. And for next year, the government has proposed a further cut, so that it will go down to around 1%. Imagine. In reality, we should cut further. All Denmark need for a defense is an answering machine to utter two words: “We surrender”.
Nah, of course not, I mean, most Danes value shared international responsibility. The 1,3% is largely spent on peace-keeping missions in Iraq and Afghanistan.
I’m just worried that this whole thing is going to give Cher a stroke. She throws a fit everyday with every little thing they do. It’s not worth it, imo. And it’s not worth it for you guys either.
I live in Massachusetts. Come November, I intend to vote for President Obama. I don’t even like him. I didn’t vote for him last time. But I have no choice. Actually I do. I could stay home and not vote. He’s still going to win Massachusetts. He’s going to win all the blue states including California, where Sasha lives. So she can stay home too. It won’t matter. I forgot where you live, Ryan but if it’s a blue state…
Anyone who lives in a red or blue state has no need to pay attention to this presidential election. Just wait it out. No biggie. It’s the swing states that matter. The rest of us are worthless. And we are increasingly treated as such. We won’t matter until the electoral college is gone and no one is fighting for that. They like their two party system just fine thank you.
I didn’t like President Obama when he was running. I always said he was a secret Republican. He doesn’t do what’s right for poor people. He just doesn’t. Maybe he isn’t as bad as the other guy. But maybe the other guy is just a place holder to make sure no credible candidates got in there. I’m not 100% sure that they’re not in cahoots. I really don’t think anyone in their right mind will vote for Romney but if there are enough crazy people in those swing states he could feasibly be our next President. And what can I do about it? Nada. What can anyone who does not live in a swing state do? Nada. So there’s no use getting high blood pressure over something you can’t do anything about it.
you make a lot of sense, Antoinette. I worry that you’re not trying very hard to fit in.
silly. they make pills for blood pressure.
@Julian…isn’t it funny that so many Americans think one or the other is going to decide anything? The two parties exchange power to differing degrees every four years and nothing changes. We’re still riddled with nonsensical drug war laws, unconstitutional surveillance practices, overly aggressive foreign policies, and an increase in taking away our rights at citizens (NDAA, drones flying over the U.S.).
Oh, and I forgot to mention his extension of the Patriot Act. Something Obama didn’t have to do. Also, what happened to closing Guantanamo?
Also, what happened to closing Guantanamo?
tony r, do you never google stuff to look for answers? or do you only rely on Steve Doocy, Sean Hannity, and Rush Limbaugh to feed you your ‘facts’?
The drone wars, the NDAA, and Obama’s stance on marijuana legalization (medical marijuana raids have been worse under Obama than Bush) prove he’s not the liberal hero that his supporters make him out to be. If people would stop looking at presidential races as a two-horse race, they’d notice that Gary Johnson is Obama without the contradictions and the big-government spending (do you WANT the debt to increase?).
As I said, I can understand your stance, Ryan. You probably feel like you are fighting a “culture war” right now, whereas I am not, because to be honest, I don’t care much which side of the political spectrum that are currently in power in Denmark (the leading parties of the right in my country is left of Obama, anyway – and can only do little damage, regardless), whereas you feel that it has real lasting significance for the future of your country who gets elected in November, right?
That’s absolutely right. I feel that way not because I’m paranoid. But because I’ve lived through a bad choice.
BushCheney threw $2 trillion down the toilet in Iraq. I don’t think Al Gore would have done that, do you?We could have used that $2 trillion dollars here in America to save every social program that’s now on the chopping block, on the brink of being dismantled — because why? Because of the deficit! The deficit that Republicans caused with pointless wars and lavish tax breaks for people who are already millionaires.
That’s the underlying Republican agenda. To drain the country’s treasury so that all the social programs the GOP has always hated will go broke.
And let’s be crystal clear. That $2 trillion? They just didn’t ship a huge mountain of cash to the desert and burn it in a bonfire. No. That $2 trillion did not disappear, it didn’t evaporate. $2 Trillion went into the pockets of war profiteers. Is there any doubt of that?
So what we had here for 8 years under Bush was a blank check for billionaire arms merchants and defense contractors to get filthy rich by murdering Iraqi children (and 4000 American soldiers).
Is this hard to believe? Don’t people get murdered for 50 bucks every day? What’s the difference to a greedy murderer who explodes the legs off an Iraqi kid if he can sell the bomb that does it for $100,000?
That makes me sick, Mads, and makes me furious. Romney is already making war noises about Iran, the next con-game sink-hole.
Clinton, Gore, Obama — I’m not saying they were never faced with a situation when a rifle had to be fired overseas. But not on such a tragic sickening scale, don’t you agree?
That’s just ONE of my concerns. You’re so lucky to live in a country where the Danish Defense Dept doesn’t suck up half of your nation’s treasure in wasted cash and the wreckage of young lives.
(Democrats do discuss our deep concerns about worrisome Democratic policies. But in an election year we share those issues privately. You would know this if you ever stop whispering “Fellatio” to the doorman. It’s Fidelio! )
Ryan,
I agree with everything you said. Loose Change was the first movie that came to my mind. To be honest with you I care so little about Obama’s America that I haven’t even seen a trailer for it. I live in a small town near a mid sized city that’s playing it. If I go to a movie this weekend it will be to either Paranorman or Expendables 2. There’s probably more truth in either one of those films!
“Mitt Romney and Paul Ryan want to abolish Medicare — a system of health care in America that has been a godsend to senior citizens for decades. Dr Romney and Dr Ryan want to get rid of that system.”
Not ABOLISH, no…but change it to a voucher system which would assist with less fraud. R&R’s plan wants is to unleash a wave of competition that wrings waste out of the health care system and delivers quality care at affordable prices. Changes do have to be made to the program though in order for it to remain at all, and I’m not sure the answer is to keep increasing taxes on the rich. Now you can disagree on the R&R change or think it’s BS but I kind of hate when people say abolish because that’s not the correct term really and makes it sound a lot more drastic.
(Once again, I’m not a Republican! Or a troll! I just play devil’s advocate perhaps a bit too much…)
In all seriousness guys, I completely missed what this has to do with rotten tomatoes. I don’t go there. So maybe if I did I would get this but sometimes, I think you guys, especially Sasha, start a rant already in progress. Meaning, I think you have arguments on twitter or elsewhere on the internet and then just come here to finish it. But I’m not sure where you started.
I’ve never heard of that book or that movie. I guess one guy who is a bad tomato gave it a good rating. But if that’s just one guy, I don’t get what happened next or why it’s so bad. It’s propaganda against Obama okay, but why is it a catastrophe if it gets a good rating?
I want to apologize ahead of time if my comments come off as sarcastic because they really aren’t meant to be. My problem with this article is not that the site is defending Obama. I’m an independent who voted for Bush in 2004 (for the same reason I won’t vote for Romney this year because I believe he and John Kerry are of the same ilk and would make terrible Presidents.) and Obama in 2008.
My problem is with the outrage that this movie has even been made and that it has gotten a positive review or two. Have any of you crying racism actually watched the film? Where was the outcry and outrage when the film Loose Change basically insinuated that President Bush engineered 9/11? Fahrenheit 9/11 may not have been a “Kerry for President” movie but to say that it wasn’t a blatant attempt to get Bush voted out of office is just flat out not true.
My advice to the people who are outraged by Obama’s America is to simply do what I will do which is simply not watch the movie, not talk about it anymore and simply use my vote as my voice on Election Day.
Chris, Your even-keeled tone is appreciated (I’ll try to replicate it for 2 minutes)
Loose Change wasn’t a real movie. As far as I know, it never screened in a single theater in any city. Maybe it was on DVD, but who would buy it, since I think most people saw it for free as an *.avi download. It looked cheap, sounded cheap, because it was cheap.
I think somebody edited Loose Change in his basement on with Windows Media MovieMaker 3 or something (not even QuickTime!) 🙂
The only people who ever saw Loose Change were internet fanatics (like me) who already suspected most of the loony things it purported to prove.
The main purpose of Sasha’s piece here is to take legitimate critics to task for giving this year’s reasonably well-produced propaganda turd a free pass just because it was reasonably well-produced.
You’d agree with that, right? This article is about how critics are reacting, right?
No critics reviewed Loose Change. It’s beneath the dignity of mainstream critics.
2016: Obama’s America should be beneath their dignity too. That’s what I take away from Sasha’s piece here.
For the record I prefer Romney’s policies over Obama. Oh, I live in Ohio too (a swing state).
I can understand the urge to make a considerable effort to make Obama’s presidency look like the the Second Coming, because if you consider the alternative (that dimwitted goon called Mitt Romney), it is tempting to resort to propaganda in favor of the better candidate. But it still is propaganda, no matter how important it seems to secure a win, or no matter how much you fear the alternative.
With the election looming, the reality is that all political discussions are clouded by the event in which shadow these discussions take place.
In five years’ time, if Obama gets reelected and another Democrat gets the vote yet again for a new term, would ardent Obama supporters feel comfortable to express a more balanced view of the man that they are currently making a hagiographic representation out of?
Obama, to me, is a conservative (a moderate one, at least) whose values are based on religion, and which I therefore find indefensible. You would never in a million years see me endorse a man who favors the death penalty (that wonderful American habit that you share with no truly democratic nation) and who hasn’t got the balls to do anything about Guantanamo (which in my eyes is a Gulag of 21st century America).
Other than that, I think Obama is doing a commendable job. I even believe that his politics (outside that toxic realm of value policies) are based on reason and sound assessments. At least, that’s something.
Ultimately, there are inherent flaws in the American political system that are perhaps more interesting than the figurehead himself: The power of the Supreme Court is one of the most egregious. Another is the tricky push-and-pull dynamics of party representation in the two chambers (that makes reform and transparency in the legislative process next to impossible).
Ryan addresses the third problem; the extended period of campaigning and the role played by money. In most European democracies there is only three weeks of campaigning every four years, the rest of the time the prime minister, the government, and the elected representatives can get to WORK, not caring too much about popular sentiment (except to pay the price of not getting reelected, of course).
Oh, and don’t get me started on the two-party system…
But to get back to my point: What always annoys me is the lack of an even-keeled debate every time an election is looming. It is like all sound reason and calm-headed assessment get thrown out the window.
Maybe the ideological stakes are higher in the US than in most European democracies that consist of a more homogenous electorate. I can understand that. The debates probably tend to get more heated when you have to deal with such a large division of attitude on fundamental aspects of law and values. In Scandinavia, we fight over who gets to administrate our welfare societies. Both left and right are preservers of a long tradition of political consensus.
The point being, that I have never heard a Dane defending a political candidate with the fervor that for example Ryan (and numerous others) does. We are passionless about politics in Denmark, I guess. You are in a position where you need to feel passionate about the pros and cons. It just seems so black and white.
It would be interesting to see some of Obama’s followers make a list of “Ten Things I Don’t Like About Obama’s Presidency”. Or “Ten Things That Obama Needs to Improve Upon For His Second Term”.
Maybe that is the kind of reflection that your country needs, rather than hagiographies on the one side and diatribes on the other.
It would be interesting to see some of Obama’s followers make a list of “Ten Things I Don’t Like About Obama’s Presidency”. Or “Ten Things That Obama Needs to Improve Upon For His Second Term”.
If any important Democrat made such a list, guess who would find it far more interesting than you do? FOX News and the RNC SuperPacs would be gnawing those lists raw for the next 9 weeks.
Republicans have established such impermeable barricade strength because they strive to be so highly disciplined there’s rarely a chink in their armor. The main reason Obama is trending well right now is because too many Republican factions have gone off message and it’s easy to portray their campaign in disarray. That’s what we want.
We need to stay tight on point right now. There will be plenty of time later for constructive criticism and meaningful expressions of discontent. Two months before an American presidential election is not that time.
Let’s please leave the news-cycle strategy to the pros on Obama’s team right now, ok?
Aside from that, Mads, thanks for another of your thoughtful and well-reasoned contributions.
To clear up a misconception: Nobody can give $100 million directly to Romney’s campaign. What people can do is fund advertising promoting the candidate of their choice. Liberal billionaires are free to run pro-Obama ads as well. (And yes, there are a few.) Voters are free to change the channel or watch Netflix and totally ignore this advertising.The liberal view of the typical voter is that he or she is a brainless boob who can be made to believe anything by a TV ad.
Ryan, I do hope you are proud that Obama is having people assassinated without due process, just like Hitler (Romney is no better, of course). I hope you are also proud that Obama is locking people in cages because they dared to use a drug he doesn’t approve of. Just minor matters to you, I’m sure.
The liberal view of the typical voter is that he or she is a brainless boob who can be made to believe anything by a TV ad.
Is that anything like the typical moviegoer who’s easily lured to a shitty movie based on what he or she believes from a TV ad? so that movie can earn its budget back on opening weekend? You know, before the public has a chance to experience how bad the reality is, before the awful truth sinks in?
Spain was sailing along nicely in the mid-2000’s. Their economy was booming because of the booming real estate industry. Spain had a surplus budget.
When that market burst, they suffered and are still suffering dramatically. Last I heard they had an unemployment rate of 24%.
Spain’s problem’s can be traced back to fundamentally two errors.
1) They depended too much on the real estate industry.
2) They are tied to the Euro. The Euro was a flawed currency.
These facts come courtesy of Paul Krugman in End This Depression Now!
—————————
Anyone who says that Democrats and Republicans are essentially the same isn’t paying attention. People who say such things should be disregarded.
“Anne Hathaway earns a comfortable salary, but she doesn’t clear $24 billion, even before taxes”
Ryan did you see The Dark Knight Rises (TDKR)? The camera proved that Anne Hathaway (The Dark Knight Rises, Rachel Getting Married) is capable of stealing literally lots of money, even from billionaires like Bruce Wayne, so I wouldn’t put this $24B number past her. That’s just my two cents!
Wall Street and banking deregulation leading to worldwide financial chaos? Republican policies made that happen.
You know Bush wanted to fix Fannie and Freddie, but Barney Frank and his committee said everything was fine right? Clinton also repealed Glass-Steagall.
Clinton also repealed Glass-Steagall.
Weird. Since, despite all Romney’s tough talk, presidents do not have the power to repeal laws.
The Republican-controlled Congress repealed Glass-Steagall.
207 Republicans voted to repeal keys provisions.
51 Democrats voted against that.
only 1 Republican voted against repeal (I think they ate that guy’s liver with a nice Chianti).
That’s after banks pumped $300 million into lobbying efforts.
A lot of Democrats in Congress voted for repeal too, and they screwed up.
Repeal was a Republican proposal and Republicans controlled Congress in 1999.
Remember? That’s how the Republican Congress had so much power to sniff out blowjobs in 1999.
The Gramm-Leach-Bailey Act is what repealed Glass-Steagall.
Who’s that? It’s these Republicans:
Sen. Phil Gramm (R, Texas)
Rep. Jim Leach (R, Iowa)
Rep. Thomas J. Bliley, Jr. (R, Virginia)
the 3 co-sponsors of the Gramm–Leach–Bliley Act that repealed Glass-Steagall.
nice try, Rashad.
— ” Clinton repealed Glass-Steagall !! ”
That’s right. Clinton also gave the Oscar for Best Picture to The English Patient instead of Fargo. Because everything that happened while Clinton was President is all his fault.
Houston, we have a big fucking problem :
http://www.deadline.com/2012/08/first-box-office-anti-obama-movie-1/#more-324507
The simple thought of THIS ‘film’ taking the top spot, makes me cringe. Hopefully it will be as frontloaded as industry insiders expect it to be. And here I was thinking, I hated enough ‘The Expendables’ to never EVER even consider rooting for the sequel…and here I am desperately hoping it WILL win the weekend.
But we’re all biased, whether it’s in politics or movies. All the same, really. If you don’t want to hear it, then don’t read or listen or pay attention. Live in a hole somewhere and shut yourself off from it. That’s what a democracy is about, free exchange of ideas and many of those ideas are, in fact, POLITICAL in nature.
Stop whining about propaganda and the bias of certain critics, when you’re making your own biases painfully obvious in the process. I’m a politically independent cinephile from the South who’s agnostic and lower middle-class (at best). I visit movie sites every day, and it’s infuriating how political (and politically biased) they’ve become. I’ve almost stopped reading MCN because of it, though I think Poland’s finally realizing he needs to ease up a bit.
USA problems are the whole world problems, mind you, Ryan. And I didn’t elect Mr. Rajoy, either.
USA problems get imposed on the world more often by Republican presidents. Wall Street and banking deregulation leading to worldwide financial chaos? Republican policies made that happen. 10-yr War in Iraq? Republican president made that happen.
Changing US Administration party affiliation is not an ON/OFF switch. Problems Bush created linger for years after he’s gone. The mess is still being cleaned up. Do you want more of what Bush caused? Then you’ll love Romney. Can you please try to have a little more patience while we try to mop up and dig out? Hang tight and give Obama the time he needs.
Don’t be angry. I genuinely have no idea what Spain’s problems may be but I didn’t intend to be flippant about it. I hope Spain has no problems! I hope we’re still friends! I might need your help finding a nice apartment in Barcelona or Madrid if Romney is elected. I’m not even joking.
P.S. We’re really sorry about the global blowjob epidemic Clinton inspired.
i agree sasha… metacritic is far superior to RT… my only problem with MC is they still include rex reed. i actually have corresponded (fancy way of saying emailed) with their movie editor on MC and i gave him that feedback. i’d encourage others to do the same. you take reed off- and MC is almost perfect.
“There are Republican voters who will vote for Romney and aren’t going to base it off pure dislike of Barack, they’ll do it because they believe Romney’s policies will be better.”
Romney has policies? Please explain to me what they are. Because I’ve been paying pretty close attention, and for the life of me, I can’t figure out what the hell he stands for.
“But Obama is just as bit as bad as Romney, only you guys and girls are too scared of the prime evil of Romney’s speech to be aware that right now.”
I’ve never bought this line of thinking. Do both parties cater to special interests? Undoubtedly. Are there things about Obama’s presidency that I’m not thrilled about. Of course (the “drone war” stuff, for example). But to then go ahead and try to say both parties are the same or equally as bad is, to me, a case of false equivalency. When Democrats are in power, the minimum wage, for example, tends to go up. When Democrats are in power, a woman’s right to choose is more protected. When Democrats are in power, we get nominees to the Supreme Court like Sotomayor and Kagan instead of ones like Alito and Scalia and Clarence Thomas. When Democrats are in power, we get things like the Affordable Care Act, which, while not perfect, is certainly better than what we had. When Democrats are in power, there’s at least somewhat less catering to the rich, and a little more focus on policy that will benefit the middle class.
Do I embrace everything the Democratic Party stands for? No. I’m a proud liberal boy, and the Democratic Party these days actually feels more centrist-leaning to me than I would prefer. But do I recognize that there’s a difference between whether a Republican is president or whether a Democrat is president? Hell yeah!
Points for the Matt Hooper line. Mistah HooPPAHHH!
@Jesus
I find it interesting that you assume people consider Bin Laden’s assassination to be Obama’s biggest accomplishment, when just yesterday in the class I’m taking on the American Presidency, our consensus was that the Affordable Care Act was his largest accomplishment, and our Professor largely emphasized how he helped prevent a second Great Depression. Bin Laden wasn’t mentioned at all.
Granted, a bunch of Minnesotan Political Science majors will have a different viewpoint than the American public at large, but it’s interesting to consider.
I find it interesting that you assume people consider Bin Laden’s assassination to be Obama’s biggest accomplishment, when just yesterday in the class I’m taking on the American Presidency, our consensus was that the Affordable Care Act was his largest accomplishment, and our Professor largely emphasized how he helped prevent a second Great Depression. Bin Laden wasn’t mentioned at all.
I love that. Sounds like a good teacher you have there.
Sasha, you’re my hero.
You too, Ryan.
Keep the truth going.
But Obama is just as bit as bad as Romney, only you guys and girls are too scared of the prime evil of Romney’s speech to be aware that right now, Obama is a liar, and just another bombing-happy president… for God’s sake, his biggest achievement, as plenty of supporters say, is said to be murdering a suspect without ever taking him to justice.
Which kind of hero or Nobel Peace Prize winner is that? I mean, how any intelligent human being consider “acceptable” a candidate like him, in the name and defense of “democracy” and “freedom”? Don’t you guys have values, anymore? Or common sense? Remember, Ryan, I said Obama was a bluff before even he was ellected Dem candidate for the White House, 4 years ago. Know whis sh*t too well, I’ve been one of “them”, sipping champagne with ambassadors.
It’s all fake. You’re going to choose only the color of the necklace you’re going to wear the next 4 years. And what amount of fakeness you’re going to face, to struggle with your not-so-sutile-anymore slavery.
Worry about your problems in Spain, Jesus. I wouldn’t presume to lecture you about whom you elect as your leader.
With respect, because you’re a longtime loyal friend of the site, you don’t have much of a clue about American politics.
If your main aggravation about Obama is that he ordered Bin Laden killed, I have say, oops, gee, sorry about that. Fuck Bin Laden. He’s the least of my concerns. He’s no longer a concern because fish have eaten his eyeballs out. I’m glad about that.
for God’s sake, his biggest achievement, as plenty of supporters say is said to be murdering a suspect without ever taking him to justice.
I don’t even have any friends who are not Obama supporters, but I can assure you: None of us think that ordering Bin Laden killed is Obama’s greatest achievement. I never even think about that anymore.
There are 20 other bigger achievements that make me proud I voted for Obama. I could list a few, but you can find them online yourself. Just Google ‘Obama Achievements.’ Skip over Bin Laden if that bugs you.
Trust me though, Bin Laden is not a big deal to Obama supporters. It’s just one small part of the cleaning up President Obama needed to do, and he did a very tidy job of it. We’ve all moved on. Go lay a wreath on the ocean if you’re still grieving for Bin Laden. I don’t know what else to say about it. Stunned to hear that it’s a sore point in Spain, seriously.
What Justice would you think appropriate for Bin Laden? Community service? Picking up litter along the highway?
Justice was done.
Someone said something mean about Obama! Run for the hills!!! LOL
Someone said something mean about Obama! Run for the hills!!!
If you think what you’re seeing is us running away, you’re advised to step out of the way before you get run over.
yeah, i was gonna say- in defense of rotten tomatoes in general though, you can always just click on the “top critics” percentage. that’s really what i glance at there
From the other side of the Atlantic, I don’t know why an article on RT’s score of a movie that ONLY has 5 reviews?
Sorry, I don’t buy the “good cop, bad cop” dynamic from a long time ago. Both cops serve for the same interests and with the same goal, they just do it in a different fashion, one from the other.
Shouldn’t be way more interesting to implement a debate on WHY you have to choose one of two?
Sorry, I don’t buy the “good cop, bad cop”
If you want the bad cop, Romney will plunge the US economy (and world economy) into another endless war, this time with Iran. Obama (the good cop) won’t.
Our last pointless war cost us 2 trillion dollars, but we sure taught that Saddam a lesson about 9/11 didn’t we? Was that a good thing for the planet, Jesus? Want more of that? Then Romney is your guy.
But Jesus, a lot of Americans are not worried about what sort of “cop” our president will be. Most of us are more concerned about what sort of “doctor” he will be.
Mitt Romney and Paul Ryan want to abolish Medicare — a system of health care in America that has been a godsend to senior citizens for decades. Dr Romney and Dr Ryan want to get rid of that system. They’ve promised to abolish The Affordable Health Care Act. They swear they will abolish it.
Dr Barack Obama wants to expand that health care to millions and millions more Americans who are currently without health care coverage. He’s vowed to do that. He’s already helped enact laws to do it. Those laws? Romney wants to repeal them. Erase them.
Maybe that choice is not important to you and your friends in Spain. But it’s important to Americans. These two men do not have the same goals. Trust me.
Want to talk about gay rights or a woman’s right to refuse the father of her rape-baby? Obama and Romney have opposite goals there too.
I know this is going to sound like a stupid arguement, and I hope you’ve read enough of my posts, Luke, to know that I am a smarter, more intelligent person than what I am about to say. But I am going to say it anyone.
According to a recent poll…
Blacks are supporting Obama 94% to 0%
Hispanics are supporting Obama 63% to 28%
Women are supporting Obama 53% to 43%
I have no idea how this works out amongst white men, but they are clearly supporting Romney.
Is Romney the candidate you want to vote for based on these percentages?
I would hope not.
What’s wrong with using the Top Critic scores on Rotten Tomatoes? Doesn’t that filter out the random “critics” who aren’t really critics?
I agree with you that this film looks like a bunch of mush and belongs on a tabloid magazine instead of playing in a movie theater. And it seems like the general critical consensus says that too.
However…you’ve said comments like this before and I’m not sure I agree with you.
“We are living in a time when our Presidential election is about to be bought legally and sold in plain sight. Thanks to the Citizens United decision, you now have men being able to throw their billions around to fund all manner of media propaganda. Perhaps, in a way, this has always been so.”
Yes, Romney has some big time fundraisers. But it’s not like Barack is without his own slew of celebrity endorsers (Anne Hathaway’s fundraising banquest – $$$ a table!)
I understand that you’re definitley anti-Romney, but it seems like sometimes your dislike of him causes you to trash people who would vote for him. Your statement kind of makes the assumption that everyone who votes for Romney is doing it because they either have a hidden agenda, are racist, or have been tricked into it by movies such as these or ads funded by his wealthy backers. There are Republican voters who will vote for Romney and aren’t going to base it off pure dislike of Barack, they’ll do it because they believe Romney’s policies will be better. (And I know that opens a different door to an argument but I’ll end it with that)
I don’t think Romney should be president. But I don’t think it’s right to insult people who think differently than me, especially if they have put serious thought into voting that way and aren’t going off of racial bias or other prejudices.
Respectfully,
Luke
Luke, I wish I had 10 or 15 minutes to explain to you how some of us feel about the money disparity. About how the SCOTUS Citizens United decision has changed the game to an unprecedented unpredictable degree.
I have to be quick, because I’m on the way out the door. In brief:
hey, it’s great that Bill Maher and Morgan Freeman have contributed $1 million each to Pres. Obama’s reelection campaign.
But you’ve heard about Sheldon Adelson, right? Adelson has vowed to spend $100 million dollars to help Romney, all by himself. One guy. One fat-cat casino owner with all that power. (the power of 100 awesome Morgan Freemans! Imagine that.)
Sheldon Adelson is worth $24 billion dollars. Anne Hathaway earns a comfortable salary, but she doesn’t clear $24 billion, even before taxes.
$100 million dollars is 4/10ths of 1% of $24 billion. Please let that sink in. If Sheldon Adelson gave 1% of his money to Romney, he’d be spending $240 million dollars. He can do that without even feeling the pinch.
Let’s say you’re a millionaire. (yay!) Voilà! You’ve got a million bucks. You want to do the same thing Sheldon Adelson is doing. You want to give 1/2 of 1% of all your money to Obama. Great! You’d be contributing $5,000.
Five thousand bucks to a millionaire is the same sacrifice as $240 million to Sheldon Adelson.
The money gushing in from this one single billionaire is staggering. And that’s not Romney’s only billionaire buddy. You’ve heard of the Koch Bros, right?
Do you see? It’s not just about the money. Obama can certainly raise $100 million from 40,000 indivual Americans. He will, and when he does, that will be great. But he doesn’t actually owe each of those 40,000 Americans any special favors though, right? Just that he keep his campaign promises, is all any normal donor asks.
Do you think Sheldon Adelson doesn’t want any special favors for $100,000,000? (Hint: Adelson is under criminal investigation by the US Justice Dept for international bribery and other illegal casino schemes in Macau, China. He could go to prison for a very long time. I wonder how he could make all those problems go away… I don’t really wonder. I know.)
It’s not only the money — though Obama will most certainly be outspent. Nope, Luke, it’s about the obscene concentration of power in the hands of a half dozen individual Billionaires who can literally spend $500 million from their tiny little club and not even blink.
5 or 6 billionaires with the election financing power of 100,000 normal American citizens. How is that right? Doesn’t that bother you? Doesn’t it worry you?
I don’t know how to spell his name but anyone who knows D’Nesh D’Souza knows he’s an idiot. The right wing even stopped using him as a talking head about a decade or more ago. He’s a fraud and everyone knows it.