1994 Oscar Shouldabeens

[Sonic Youth]

Watch out for him. He's really sneaky

If I'm so sneaky, how come you think I'm dumb?

Because you're not smart enough to hide your dishonest intentions effectively.



Edited By Big Magilla on 1299640654

[criddic3]

Watch out for him. He's really sneaky

If I'm so sneaky, how come you think I'm dumb? This is the same argument people had for President Bush. "He's an idiot," they all said. But ooh watch out! He's soooo sneaky. To be sneaky you have to have some sense of clever manipulation of events or wording that could trick someone into believing something they otherwise would not. Or to do something they would not. For example, people who said Bush was incredibly dumb also said he was able to manipulate the people into voting for them in 2004. If this isn't a ridiculous oxymoron, I don't know what is.

Meanwhile, while you are trying to decide on which is the more appropriate term that fits to the Bush administration, if racist or intolerant, there is people being massacreed daily because of its policy. Don´t you conisder that terrifying?

People are being massacred daily BECAUSE of his policies? Gee, I don't see that being the case. Can you tell me what you are talking about?

[Hustler]

Meanwhile, while you are trying to decide on which is the more appropriate term that fits to the Bush administration, if racist or intolerant, there is people being massacreed daily because of its policy. Don´t you conisder that terrifying?

[Hustler]

Nigel Hawthorne over Tim Robbins in The Shawshank Redemption...was the biggest surprise

Hawthorne nomination was the consequence of Weinstein´s campaign.

[Sonic Youth]

I was attacking the blanket determination that President Bush is racist.

I never said he was racist. I said he was intolerant (please see my original post below). And I never even said he was specifically, I "finger-pointed" his administration (of which, yes, he does set the tone). God, Sonic is right. You really do just manipulate everyone's words, don't you?

I know whereof I speak.

Watch out for him. He's really sneaky.



Edited By Big Magilla on 1299640537

[criddic3]

I never said he was racist. I said he was intolerant (please see my original post below). And I never even said he was specifically, I "finger-pointed" his administration (of which, yes, he does set the tone). God, Sonic is right. You really do just manipulate everyone's words, don't you?

"Manipulate" isn't accurate. Everyone interprets what they read or hear, and what I saw in your statements about the administration on this topic was an accusation of racism and intolerance. When someone says that the adminstration (and by explicit extension the President) has bred a "culture of intolerance," how is a reader to interpret that as anything other than an implication of racist/discriminatory attitudes?

I'm sorry to seem so defensive here (not to mention, urging this discussion in the wrong thread), but perhaps a clarification of what you actually meant (if this wasn't your intention) might make this little simpleton understand how his perception was wrong in this case.

[Greg]

I hold a prestigious position as a defense contractor with one of the most rigorous programs in the U.S. Navy

Ironically, you're probably much better off, at least financially, due to George W. Bush.

[flipp525]

I was attacking the blanket determination that President Bush is racist.

I never said he was racist. I said he was intolerant (please see my original post below). And I never even said he was specifically, I "finger-pointed" his administration (of which, yes, he does set the tone). God, Sonic is right. You really do just manipulate everyone's words, don't you?

[rudeboy]

On-topic...I agree that Mirren and Harris should've been left off in place of Robin Wright and the never-been-better-and-never-will-again Kirsten Dunst.

I'll never get the love for Dunst's performance. I find her entirely wooden and lifeless (well maybe that was the point...), and certainly less impressive than in her vivid performances in The Virgin Suicides or Crazy/Beautiful.

I agree that Mirren didn't really deserve her mention, she did nothing memorable in King George (how she won best actress at Cannes is beyond me). Haven't seen Harris, but my favourites for the year include Elodie Bouchez for The Wild Reeds, Rachel Griffiths for her wonderfully vivacious performance in Muriel's Wedding - oscar eligible the following year, I know - and Kristin Scott Thomas for her sharp-tongued work in Four Weddings and a Funeral.

[criddic3]

criddic, don't question my intelligence. I graduated summa cum laude from an extremely reputable institution, I hold a prestigious position as a defense contractor with one of the most rigorous programs in the U.S. Navy, and I'm a published writer. You don't know anything about me.

I wasn't meaning to imply you are not intelligent, but that your statement was not very intelligent. But I seriously don't care if you graduated from the best university in America or abroad. That doesn't mean you're incapable of saying something unintelligent or wrong. It's nice to know you have a brain, but I wasn't attacking that. I was attacking the blanket determination that President Bush is racist.

criddic, refresh my memory, but I can't think of a single OPENLY gay person in the Bush adminstration (I have no doubt there's plenty of self-loathing closdet cases scoring some action in White House bathrooms and maybe with some make-shift glory holes in the basement).

I have read in some places that one administration official was gay, but you are quite correct that this is not confirmed. My point is that President Bush has made a point of surrounding himself with people from many different backgrounds and seems to really take their advice seriously.

But he has gladly gone along with Karl Rove's demonization of queers and the disenfranchisement of African-American voters, and the pitting of poor whites against poor blacks for political gain.

If you are referring to the Gay Marraige ban, I don't believe this is a reflection of him hating gay people. I think he has the belief that marraige is defined as "between a man and a woman," a view he shares with more liberal politicians I might add. This is not necessarily homophobic in nature. I have declared many times on this board, as an openly gay man, that I do not think this country is ready for gay marriage and that the aggressive push for it by activists is causing people to reject the idea before it can even see the light of day. I have advocated for Civil Union as kind of a test of society's ability to accept long-term gay relationships, alongside straight ones.

Too many gay activists see this approach as exclusionary or hurtful, when in fact their own inability to consider the idea is what really hurts their cause.

The fact that Laura Bush has expressed concern about a Constitutional Ammendment, as well as the fact that Vice-president Cheney's daughter is gay, makes me less likely to believe that President Bush wishes ill of gay people.

He may be like many who don't truly understand the nature of such relationships, but I wouldn't call that intolerance. He has said his idea of an amendment is to stop "activist judges" from overturning the will of the people, who in many states have rejected gay marraige at the ballot box. The Legislature vs. the Courts.

How exactly has he "gone along with the disenfranchisement of African-Americans"?

How exactly has he "pitted poor whites against poor blacks for political gain"?

[Damien]

President Bush has included African-Americans, Jews, Gays and others into his trusted circle of advisors and top-level positions within the government.

criddic, refresh my memory, but I can't think of a single OPENLY gay person in the Bush adminstration (I have no doubt there's plenty of self-loathing closdet cases scoring some action in White House bathrooms and maybe with some make-shift glory holes in the basement).

I don't think Bush is prejudiced on a person-by-person basis. His obvious, ummm, affection for that smug bitchh Condoleezza Rice indicates as much. But he has gladly gone along with Karl Rove's demonization of queers and the disenfranchisement of African-American voters, and the pitting of poor whites against poor blacks for political gain. So this moronic Ivy League-educated Boy King is just as bad as some poor-assed ignorant redneck. In fact, he's much worse ebcause he should know better.

[dws1982]

I know I have supported President Bush all along, but this statement is simply unfair. President Bush has included African-Americans, Jews, Gays and others into his trusted circle of advisors and top-level positions within the government. After 9/11, he went out of his way to say that we should not take our anger out on Muslim-Americans. This is not something he had to do, and it is not the act of someone who practices or advocates intolerance.

The whole "if you're not with us, you're against us" mentality that he's responsible is intolerant. It may not be intolerance based on sexual preference or race, but he doesn't seem to have any tolerance for dissent. As soon as he began his war on terror, it became clear that anyone who disagrees with his policies is considered unpatriotic, or doesn't support the troops, or wants to see America fail. That mentality is intolerant.

[flipp525]

I thought most of the people on this board were at least intelligent enough to know the difference between individual behavior and generalized finger-pointing.

criddic, don't question my intelligence. I graduated summa cum laude from an extremely reputable institution, I hold a prestigious position as a defense contractor with one of the most rigorous programs in the U.S. Navy, and I'm a published writer. You don't know anything about me.

[criddic3]

It's this whole culture of intolerance that's been bred by the Bush administration

I know I have supported President Bush all along, but this statement is simply unfair. President Bush has included African-Americans, Jews, Gays and others into his trusted circle of advisors and top-level positions within the government. After 9/11, he went out of his way to say that we should not take our anger out on Muslim-Americans. This is not something he had to do, and it is not the act of someone who practices or advocates intolerance. Just because someone is rich, powerful and conservative doesn't make that person an ouright racist.

If some people want to go out and spew hatred into the world, that's their problem and their sickness. Don't blame the government for all of societies problems. They may not do everything right and some of them aren't very good people, but to just automatically link incidents of intolerence to the President is wrong. There are left-leaning people in this country who are just as hateful and discriminatory as you think conservatives are. I think this was an insensitive, inflammatory remark. I thought most of the people on this board were at least intelligent enough to know the difference between individual behavior and generalized finger-pointing.

[flipp525]

Well I said I'd nominate him, I didn't say I'd give him the award. Neither Turturro nor Leguizamo are as annoying as Will Ferrell, Adam Sandler or Rob Schneider.

True, although I have to give Rob Schneider a pass for recently coming out against Mel Gibson's disgusting anti-Semitic comments. It's this whole culture of intolerance that's been bred by the Bush administration. People think it's suddenly okay to actively and openly hate on disenfranchised groups, more than ever before.

On-topic...I agree that Mirren and Harris should've been left off in place of Robin Wright and the never-been-better-and-never-will-again Kirsten Dunst.