Apologies to Candace

It's safe to say you're treated on this newsgroup the way you deserve
to be treated, George (note heavy irony).

I don't think I actually called Dubya a "war criminal" here, but since
you brought it up, I heartily concur that he is one. Since we now live
in a virtual dictatorship in this country and I've publicly posted I
think this cretin is a war criminal, I might end up in a Gulag. Then
you can toast my departure, Georgie.

Actually I'd rather talk about Charlie than Ann Coulter any day, but
there doesn't seem to be much of the little fellow here recently.
 >> Stay informed about: Apologies to Candace 

Wait a second, George. I didn't catch this last line in your last post:

"It's beyond the pale for civilized discourse" (to call Dubya a war
criminal).

What on earth do you call what your compatriot Coulter says about the
9-11 widows? I personally think her comments about Spencer Tracy are
even more galling, but you defend this Bimbette on her 9-11 widow
harrangue?
 >> Stay informed about: Apologies to Candace 

ulysses DeleteThis @mscomm.com (Candace)
wrote:

>It's safe to say you're treated on this
>newsgroup the way you deserve to be
>treated, George (note heavy irony).

No. I don't deserve to be called
a fascist, a traitor, and a draft dodger.


>I don't think I actually called Dubya a
>"war criminal" here, but since you
>brought it up, I heartily concur that he is
>one.

Very Sheehan of you.

> Since we now live in a virtual
>dictatorship in this country and I've
>publicly posted I think this cretin is a war
>criminal, I might end up in a Gulag. Then
>you can toast my departure, Georgie

So you're paranoid as well as a twit?

>Actually I'd rather talk about Charlie than
>Ann Coulter any day, but there doesn't
>seem to be much of the little fellow here
>recently.

That's because of Carnahan, Totheroh,
Shush, and all those who regularly
politicize the group.....and expect me
to be silent in response.
 >> Stay informed about: Apologies to Candace 

ulysses.TakeThisOut@mscomm.com (Candace)
wrote:

>Wait a second, George. I didn't catch
>this last line in your last post:

>>"It's beyond the pale for civilized
>>discourse" (to call Dubya a war criminal).

>What on earth do you call what your
>compatriot Coulter says about the 9-11
>widows?

She says they're 4 Bush-haters who
hide behind their widowhood. True!

> I personally think her comments about
>Spencer Tracy are even more galling,

She is not a movie historian.

>but you defend this Bimbette on her 9-11
>widow harrangue?

Absolutely..,maybe you might take the
time read what she wrote:
 >> Stay informed about: Apologies to Candace 

Candace 6/22/06 9:40 PM

> Actually I'd rather talk about Charlie than Ann Coulter any day, but
> there doesn't seem to be much of the little fellow here recently.

Please join our discussions about the Essanay period.

JN
 >> Stay informed about: Apologies to Candace 

George Shelps 6/22/06 11:24 PM

>> I personally think her comments about
>> Spencer Tracy are even more galling,
>
> She is not a movie historian.

Then why offer opinions about something she knows nothing about?

I don't give a rip about her politics as far as this is concerned. I can
dismiss her phony political sideshow. But she stepped into the ring by
stating Bogart and Bacall were has-been liberals trying to make a name for
themseleves by going against McCarthyism.

You can not defend her on this, George. She said something stupid in regard
to Bogart and Bacall. Even if she was asked "What do you think of Humphrey
Bogart and Lauren Bacall going against McCarthyism," her answer was stupid.
If she said "I disagree with them" or "I think they were terrible to do so"
or "oh they were a couple of card carrying liberals" that would be fine.
But has-beens trying to make names for themselves? Stupid stupid stupid.

That is exactly like saying John Wayne was a has-been trying to make a name
for himself by supporting the Vietnam war.

Stupid

I used to dismiss her as an insignficant choir preacher. Now I deeply
dislike her. I don't want her to get hurt, or even to lose any success.
But I think of her with condescension and contempt for her complete and
utter stupidity.

JN
 >> Stay informed about: Apologies to Candace 

George - Can you clarify your comment? Are you saying it's wrong to
call the President a war criminal in and of itself (i.e. no matter what
the facts) or it's wrong to call the President a war criminal because
there is absolutely no evidence to support this claim?



George Shelps wrote:
> No Apologies to Candace
>
>
> She's been treated the way someone
> who calls the President a war criminal
> deserves to be treated. It's beyond
> the pale for civilized discourse.
 >> Stay informed about: Apologies to Candace 

Candace wrote:

> I can't imagine any liberal denigrating the Duke, Coop, Bob Hope, Chuck
> Heston, John Ford or Jimmy Stewart because they were all conservatives.
> "Oops! I can't watch Rear Window tonight 'cause that Republican
> dirtball, Jimmy Stewart is in it..." Yet Conservatives like Coulter
> trash a truly great star like Bogie and an iconic genius like Charlie,
> solely based on their left-leaning politics. Pathetic.

Sometimes liberals goof on right-wing actors, and make them the
butt of jokes (Charlton Heston, for example, or the Ronald Reagan of
the BEDTIME FOR BONZO era).

Conservatives take a different approach with left-wing actors,
though. There's no sense of humor, just anger (Jane Fonda) or a
sneering sort of scorn (Martin Sheen). That's the main difference I
see, but I agree with you. It's hard to imagine a bunch of liberals
picketing a Charlton Heston movie, whereas right-wing protesters drove
Chaplin's LIMELIGHT out of some American theaters.



--Shush--
 >> Stay informed about: Apologies to Candace 

James Neibaur wrote:

> Shush 6/23/06 3:46 PM
> > Sometimes liberals goof on right-wing actors, and make them the
> > butt of jokes (Charlton Heston, for example, or the Ronald Reagan of
> > the BEDTIME FOR BONZO era).
>
> I thought Bonzo was a fun family movie.

But back in the '80s, it was the only Reagan movie anyone ever
talked about, the one we saw the most clips of on TV. The image of an
exasperated future President dealing with a chimp was all over the
place, and "Bonzo" became shorthand for "Reagan" (for example, the
Ramones' song "Bonzo Goes to Bitberg").


> And I have become oddly protective
> of Charlton Heston's legacy.

Heston seems like a genuinely nice man who doesn't take himself too
seriously. I think there was a left-wing bid to cast him as a symbol of
all the gun nuts in America, and it never took hold, because attacking
Charlton Heston would be like attacking your own grandfather.
Right-wingers have never been able to tar the liberal Walter Cronkite,
for the same reason.



--Shush--
 >> Stay informed about: Apologies to Candace 

Shush wrote:
> Candace wrote:
>
> > I can't imagine any liberal denigrating the Duke, Coop, Bob Hope, Chuck
> > Heston, John Ford or Jimmy Stewart because they were all conservatives.
> > "Oops! I can't watch Rear Window tonight 'cause that Republican
> > dirtball, Jimmy Stewart is in it..." Yet Conservatives like Coulter
> > trash a truly great star like Bogie and an iconic genius like Charlie,
> > solely based on their left-leaning politics. Pathetic.
>
> Sometimes liberals goof on right-wing actors, and make them the
> butt of jokes (Charlton Heston, for example, or the Ronald Reagan of
> the BEDTIME FOR BONZO era).

A theater near UC Santa Barbara made a small fortune by booking
BEDTIME FOR BONZO right after Reagan was elected governor of California
in 1966.
>

> Conservatives take a different approach with left-wing actors,
> though. There's no sense of humor, just anger (Jane Fonda) or a
> sneering sort of scorn (Martin Sheen). That's the main difference I
> see, but I agree with you. It's hard to imagine a bunch of liberals
> picketing a Charlton Heston movie, whereas right-wing protesters drove
> Chaplin's LIMELIGHT out of some American theaters.
>

More than some, I'm afraid.
But you're right. The right-wing approach is Fox News; the left-wing
approach is THE DAILY SHOW..
 >> Stay informed about: Apologies to Candace 

Robt Moulton wrote:

>it's wrong to call the President a war
>criminal in and of itself (i.e. no matter
>what the facts) or it's wrong to call the
>President a war criminal because there
>is absolutely no evidence to support this
>claim?

There is no evidence to support the
claim, except political hostility and
a desire to see Bush and the GOP
out of power.
 >> Stay informed about: Apologies to Candace 

Shush 6/23/06 3:46 PM

> Sometimes liberals goof on right-wing actors, and make them the
> butt of jokes (Charlton Heston, for example, or the Ronald Reagan of
> the BEDTIME FOR BONZO era).

I thought Bonzo was a fun family movie. And I have become oddly protective
of Charlton Heston's legacy.

> Conservatives take a different approach with left-wing actors,
> though. There's no sense of humor, just anger (Jane Fonda) or a
> sneering sort of scorn (Martin Sheen). That's the main difference I
> see, but I agree with you. It's hard to imagine a bunch of liberals
> picketing a Charlton Heston movie, whereas right-wing protesters drove
> Chaplin's LIMELIGHT out of some American theaters.
 >> Stay informed about: Apologies to Candace 

Shush 6/23/06 4:55 PM

>> And I have become oddly protective
>> of Charlton Heston's legacy.
>
> Heston seems like a genuinely nice man who doesn't take himself too
> seriously. I think there was a left-wing bid to cast him as a symbol of
> all the gun nuts in America, and it never took hold, because attacking
> Charlton Heston would be like attacking your own grandfather.
> Right-wingers have never been able to tar the liberal Walter Cronkite,
> for the same reason.

Heston was very kind to a friend of mine, and despite my disagreement with
on some issues, I know he is a class act.

JN
 >> Stay informed about: Apologies to Candace