When I was young and un-schooled, I used to marvel at how a group of dull-witted congressmen on the House of Un-American adctivities committee could cow an entire industry into firing the liberal and commies in their midst.
I used to wonder: Why did the unions, the movie executives, and all the other high-rollers in the movie business go along with this? Why didn't movie people tell the third-rate government know-nothings to buzz off, they'd hire whoever they felt was right for the job?
But now I'm older, and have long since figured it out. The motivator was fear. Fear of losing their exalted positions, fear of facing angry boycotts, fear of losing comfortable salaries. It was easier to go along than stand up and take risks, so go along everyone did ...
... until the ever feisty Kirk Douglas broke the Black List by giving Dalton Trumbo, longtime Tinsel Town Leftie and one of the Hollywood Ten, a screen credit on one of the biggest films of 1960. When the sky didn't fall, and nobody east of San Gabriel cared, and (most important) movie grosses didn't tank, the blanklist imploded.
I occasionally think about those things in this job, because I often get to see fear and paranoia close up. Take uncompensated overtime. It's a fact of life in the industry, a fact of life at animation studios. And over the past twenty years it's been an issue with employees at Warners, Disney, DreamWorks Animation, Fox, Film Roman, etc.
The last few weeks, it's percolated up at yet another employer. (Nothing new in that; u.c. is ubiquitous and goes in cycles, studio to studio.) Just yesterday an artist said to me:
"We've gotten slammed by difficult shows lately and everybody is working until eight o'clock at night and part of the weekend to keep up. The directors understand they need to have some simpler shows sprinkled in there so the crews can keep up. They didn't do that before, but they say they'll change things now. Meantime everybody is working their butts off to hit the deadlines ..."
Another artist came in last week with the same complaint. I asked her to round up his unhappy colleagues and we'd do a lunch meeting, get some ducks in a row, and I could go to management with the (collective) complaints. But this morning she calls to say:
"Nobody wants to do anything, Steve. Nobody wants to go to lunch, they're afraid somebody might see them. The guy I thought was right there with me now says, 'Hey, I've got a kid and wife. This isn't a good thing for me to do right now, this taking on the company. I'm just going to roll with the punches, do the extra work, not make trouble' ..."
None of this is new. It happens in waves, year after year, in good times and bad. Sometimes there are people who push back, more times there are folks who go with the flow.
The psychological dynamic is fairly constant: fear. Fear of being labeled "troublemaker," fear of not being a team player, fear of getting laid off or terminated if they are in any way militant, and maybe put on some kind of "blacklist."
Sound familiar at all?
Years ago I pleaded with a production assistant at the now-defunct Klasky-Csupo to push back against the company, since she was making below minimum wage with all the free overtime that she was putting in. (It was illegal then, it's illegal now.) Her response?
"Oh, I couldn't do anything like that! I'm working on The Simpsons! And Gabor will get me blacklisted! I'll never work again!
All I could think at the time was "Wow. Blacklisted from a job paying less than the minimum wage ..." But from her perspective, the job had status, and she was willing to take abuse if it meant she could stay with the Yellow Family. It was a strong motivator for her, and who am I to say she was wrong?
Now it's my belief, based on long experience, that horrible repercussions are, in actuality, a lot less than frightened animation employees imagine. But who am I to say that an artist making $1600 or $1900 a week is wrong to knuckle under and work weekends for free? The risk of "doing something" isn't zero, and they have a job they love, so they will bend over backward to hang onto it, even if there is abuse. Because fear is a powerful motivator, even when it means undermining your own best interests.
Yeah, I totally get how the blacklist happened, because I still see smaller versions of it, sixty years farther on.
Posts
49 comments:
I'm sorry Steve, it's apples and oranges. Everyone with a job today is aware of the scarcity of opportunities to work. They see their colleagues struggling to survive, praying for a paycheck of any kind and know it could easily be them in their place. Of course, the studios aren't above exploiting the situation and milking their labor dollars for all they are worth. They would love to lower salaries, but they can't because of the contract, so they squeeze.
Fear? Not in this market. In this market, it's reality. The people who are working don't just think they are lucky to have a job, they know they are.
How the hell does that compare with the blacklist? What leverage did congress have over the motion picture industry? What did they all have to fear? Could the government have shut down Paramount or MGM? Collectively, they could have told the HUAC to shove it, stay out of our business, like Kirk Douglas eventually did, and it hardly caused a ripple.
It remains a mystery. It appears that the entire entertainment industry cooperated voluntarily and capitulated to a handful of paranoid wingnuts. Pete Seeger couldn't even get a job in a coffee house for years and all he did before the committee was assert his right to keep his voting choices private. For that he was declared a "hostile witness."
How does that horror show compare with some poor slob justifiably hanging on to his difficult to find job for dear life?
Ah, fruit. I could do with a fruit smoothie right about now.
The point was, fear can make anyone do just about anything, even if it's to their detriment. That's what really drove the Blacklist in the 50's, and it's what shortchanges the Animation Guild now.
Sure, jobs are scarce right now. That shouldn't mean that employees should take the idiotic schedules with pathetic pay by the studios with no complaint whatsoever.
If being a "troublemaker" is wanting to see one's family more than 20 minutes a day because the day job is sucking up every amount of waking time, then this industry is going to continue to sink.
Everyone's always complained about the animation industry, but seriously, the lack of backbone for simple things like not wanting to be worked to the point of mind-numbing ineptitude is sad.
Question: when have you seen conditions get better when no one will stand up for themselves?
I have a friend who is living proof that blacklisting is a real threat. She tried to push back and fight the good fight and now she's been out of work for over a year and a half. Producers and directors consider her a troublemaker. Fear of being blacklisted is very justifiable.
It does exist. And it can be fought. Years ago I brought in a fellow I knew for a show I was running. The studio management and directors were "worried" because he was considered "trouble". I said he was a sound professional and would get the job done. He was hired, reluctantly, and I was warned if anything went wrong it was MY fault. After a few months the fellow WAS found to be professional and creative. He soon was moved off my show to another series that became the longest running animated series in history. I stood up and he got a job.
But I am also considered a bit of a 'trouble' at studios so have not been at work for a while. An exec once told me my problem was that I said "no to management as often as I said no to artists, and that no one could work in this business long saying no to management."
"Fruit?" "Fruit salad?" What?
Managers, studio execs and studio owners who demand long hours, should show up on evenings and weekends just like the artists do.
rufus
As for the opening statement about how liberals and commies were once blacklisted, now the opposite is true. Anyone who has traditional or conservative values and is not a "progressive" is shunned by the film industry. There are a lot of people in the business that are forced to keep their viewpoints a secret, in the closet if you will, for fear of losing their jobs or getting hired for future ones. A pathetic situation.
Reality check:
Back when the cartoon industry was thriving, when jobs were plentiful, when salaries were going up, I got the same reaction to standing up that I do now.
It was ""No, can't do that, something bad might happen. We're afraid ..."
It's a bit more pronounced now, but really not much different.
It's also why I link it to the fifties blacklist. There was no reason why Hollywood couldn't have told the nitwits on HUAC to stuff it, but they didn't, largely because of fear.
Kirk Douglas was one of the few who gave the status quo the finger. (There were a few others.)
Anyone who has traditional or conservative values and is not a "progressive" is shunned by the film industry. There are a lot of people in the business that are forced to keep their viewpoints a secret, in the closet if you will, for fear of losing their jobs or getting hired for future ones. A pathetic situation.
Sure. That's why John Voight, Mel Gibson, Kelsey Grammer, Gary Sinise, Patricia Heaton (to name a few) just can't find any work.
There's this great liberal blacklist.
Anyone who has traditional or conservative values and is not a "progressive" is shunned by the film industry.
Utter nonsense, and silly conservative victim persecution complex. There are a number of political conservatives at the large studio where I work, who aren't too shy about their views or religion. They are valued, talented employees, and I have NEVER heard any suggestion that they, or anyone else, be blacklisted for their views.
Additionally, I will point out the abject silliness of comparing what you're talking about to the willful, Congressional government iron fist coming down on people in the 50's with the HUAC, as compared to today. There is no comparison.
"Sure. That's why John Voight, Mel Gibson, Kelsey Grammer, Gary Sinise, Patricia Heaton (to name a few) just can't find any work."
Of all working actors, there ARE only a FEW who have the stones to admit being conservative. Usually they were well established in their careers before being outspoken about it.
"Utter nonsense, and silly conservative victim persecution complex."
Steve's post is about people's fear of their jobs for being outspoken. This is exactly the same thing. Far from being nonsense, there is definitely prejudice toward conservative thought, particularly in the creative fields.
Widespread disagreement toward conservatives? Sure.
Prejudice? Never seen it.
On the other hand, if you'd like to see real prejudice, try getting a job as an openly gay guy in Utah.
It isn't just artists that are a little fearful of being conservative. Producers and management have the same problem. Hollywood certainly does have something against anyone who isn't politically inline with the majority.
What are you saying when you say conservative?
Do you mean family-focused hours and treating your employees like human beings, or do you mean praying at company meetings?
The Conservatives you mention are well established and powerful to a degree. Ask some grip, second AD, script supervisor or such to admit they're conservative. It won't happen Steve.
Your response is like saying: "Hey, Glen Keane has no problem working so why would anyone complain?" It's not the heavy hitters that can afford to lose a job and still pay the bills, it's the ones in the middle that keep quite. In animation and in live-action. I was at a dinner with some friends that keep their politics to themselves and we were talking with a big producer. The subject turned to politics and he blurted out: "I'd like to f@&*ing kill all those damn Republicans!" We glanced at each other and kept quite. My friends would have lost out on a business deal that was going through if they'd mentioned that they're conservative, much less.. Republicans. Gasp!
It's real and it does happen, Steve. Sorry that you don't see it but I and many others do and have. I don't wear my politics on my sleeve but a lot of Liberals I work with do. And the ones that are in the hiring positions make it clear: Republicans won't be hired. Unless you're John Voight, Mel Gibson, Kelsey Grammer, Gary Sinise and all those people that can afford to take a punch in the wallet.
Talking to Dejas or Goldberg is a lot different that talking to someone who boards or is an in betweener.
Kinda like your friends in the industry, huh Steve?
With all the Anonymous posts, it's clear fear is still working quite well.
I still remember old guys shouting down their bosses thirty years ago. Maybe they had another job to go to - or maybe not. In any case, they sure had guts.
The victims of the HUAC were not simply objects of political snobbery, they were treated like traitors, like enemy combatants they didn't just lose their jobs, they lost their lives.
Also, their victims were not just "commies" or "pinkos," anyone who objected to their methods, even using constitutional or principle oriented arguments were included. Anyone who was subpoenaed to appear and didn't immediately start "naming
names" became an official pariah. There was never an official mechanism established to undo the damage. The effects of the committee just faded away gradually, long after Sen, McCarthy's censure, long after the death of Stalin and long after the committee itself.
Exactly when were liberals responsible for that kind of damage to our society and freedoms?
And, yes, it's just like complaining about unpaid overtime.
Ask some grip, second AD, script supervisor or such to admit they're conservative. It won't happen Steve.
Once more the reality check:
There are plenty of below-the-line workers who are conservatives. (I know, I rep some of them). Nobody cares what their political leanings are because they are far down the food chain. (And yes, some are quite vocal about their stances.)
The above is as wrong as the earlier: Anyone who has traditional or conservative values and is not a "progressive" is shunned by the film industry.
Both statements are unsupported by specifics or anything else resembling facts.
It's real and it does happen, Steve. Sorry that you don't see it but I and many others do and have.
Talking to Dejas or Goldberg is a lot different that talking to someone who boards or is an in betweener.
Kinda like your friends in the industry, huh Steve?
Anecdotal evidence is just that: anecdotal.
Funny, but I regularly go to lunch with conservatives who work steadily in the biz.
The only time TAG has endorsed a political candidate was when Gray Davis ran for governor (first term). I was unenthusiastic about doing it but the IA insisted, so we dutifully held a vote to endorse at a General Membership meeting.
The vote came down 53% for, 47% against. So we got the IA the endorsement it wanted.
But that isn't my point. The point is, the active membership (which would be the folks working), were okay with express its political opinion and almost half were against the Democrat.
But how can that be? If conservatives can't get jobs in the film business (as stated above.)
Sure. That's why John Voight, Mel Gibson, Kelsey Grammer, Gary Sinise, Patricia Heaton (to name a few) just can't find any work.
There's this great liberal blacklist.
Yeah Nonsense! Like when Michael Ovitz mentioned that he faced pressuring from the "gay mafia" of the hollywood elite, and after mentioning that, he was black listed.
Its also advisable that many of you actually look up the facts surrounding mccarthyism and the HUAC, because its being suggested in here in post after post that it was all an evil effort to crush creative hollywood types, and nothing more.
Communism was REAL and there were efforts in hollywood by communist organizations to generate sympathy for the cause. You only need to look up the FBI files on the subject to see that it wasn't made up.
You think that the government just wanted to ruin careers in hollywood? To what end? For kicks? How deluded do you have to be to think that an effort like that would be seen through for NO good reason.
The question asked of the ten who were blacklisted was not
"Do you believe in communism?"
It was not
"Are you sympathetic to communist causes?"
It was
"Are you a member of the communist party"
Communist Russia's efforts to overthrow the US government are well documented and nothing to sneeze at. If you were a member of the communist party and you were asked that question and could not answer it under oath, then quite simply, you were busted for acts that are arguably treasonous.
They got what they deserved and the sad fact of this issue is how many americans in here don't understand what the situation was.
Oh man, we are all so dumb in comparision to Arlo! Thank you so much for coming here and cluing all us dummies in!
*swoon*
My hero!
Arlo said: "the sad fact of this issue is how many americans in here don't understand what the situation was."
It is apparent that you don't understand what the situation was.
During the 30's, in the Great Depression, many people searched around for answers during a period of the worst economic collapse in our nation's history. With rampant unemployment, it seemed as though capitalism had failed us.
As a result, people flirted with membership in the Communist party during the 30's Depression as a way to make sense of the crushing economic collapse they saw around them. (The Soviet Union was not considered an enemy of the US at the time.) Others, like Henry Ford, Charles Lindberg, Henry Luce (the founder of Time Magazine), and Preston Bush (W.'s grandfather) proclaimed their support of Hitler for his economic turnaround of Germany from its (even worse) depression.
Flash forward to the 50's, and the HUAC. The Depression is over. WWII is over. World geopolitics have changed. The Soviet Union is now our enemy and rival. The people who flirted with the Communist Party in the 30's have drifted away from it. And contrary to the bad history you tried to peddle, the actual question the HUAC asked was:
"Are you now or have you ever been a member of the Communist Party?"
Destroying people's lives because of a past association of a movement that seemed reasonable at the time of the Great Depression is what the HUAC was doing. Far from being treasonous acts, trying to learn more about communism during the Depression was simply a way to try to make sense of the socio-economic collapse of the time. A collapse brought on by a doddering conservative president, by the way.
Meanwhile, today's teabagging movement in this country actually IS engaging in treason when it actively hopes for our country to fail. Rush Limbaugh is engaging in REAL treason when he actively hopes our president, and our nation, will fail. Support your president in this time of war. Support your president in this time of economic hardship, brought on by eight years of conservative mismanagement.
Most amusing of all, Arlo actually fears the "gay mafia," and feels sorry for that incompetent idiot Michael Ovitz.
Don't worry...NO ONE takes Arlo seriously. Accept maybe those that take Beck, Limbaugh and Palin seriously - a small obnoxious minority.
Most amusing of all, Arlo actually fears the "gay mafia,"
I also said I'm the king of France. Really.
Did you really just MAKE THAT UP? I never said anything of the sort. You were so busy typing out your petty little rant of inverted logic(support this president and his war - but not the last president and his war - party before country), that you didn't even read my post.
I'd rather you were back out on the street holding up paper mache heads and squealing about Haliburton running the nation.
Your grasp of history is as tenuous as your understanding of patriotism. Based on what we've now learned from previously secret Soviet intelligence archives, and from FBI decryptions of Soviet intelligence cables during that era, one can see clearly that the liberal Democratic establishment of the 1930's and 1940's allowed itself to be naively infiltrated by communist (pro-Soviet) sympathizers, many of whom were spying for the tyrannical and murderous regime of Joseph Stalin, or who were accepting financial support from the same repressive dictatorship.
You know this is a very bad recession, with houses being foreclosed and jobs hard to come by. Can I affiliate myself with a nation we are at war with? Is that what you are defending? You're an idiot.
note to self:
First name on my blacklist is Arlo (for being an obnoxious moron)
That you will not support our Commander-in-Chief in a time of war speaks volumes about your "patriotism." Putting your party in front of country indeed. It is you teabaggers who wish our nation to fail, simply because you lost the election, like the petty, partisan extremists that you are.
NONE of the blacklisted hollywood workers were EVER Soviet spies, or any such paranoid freak fantasy of yours. I get my history from reputable sources, not Ann Coulter "books". Your hero Joe McCarthy goes down in history as one of the most shameful figures in American history, and your meager attempt at historical revisionism is likewise shameful.
"Communist Russia's efforts to overthrow the US government are well documented..."
Go ahead, Arlo, cite the "documents." We're listening.
"...acts that are arguably treasonous."
"Arguably?" That's the point, isn't it? When the simple act of joining a political party becomes an act of treason then this is no longer America. The enemy has already won. That's what the HUAC was trying to do. What they were doing in the name of defending the country started to smell bad. When the stink got to be too strong to ignore, Senator McCarthy got "busted" by congress.
Just because some of the suspected Communist sympathizers were actual Communist sympathizers, it still doesn't mean they were traitors, even though that was the perception that the supporters of the HUAC and their methods were trying to create.
All countries have spies, lobbyists and sympathizers. That's normal. Maybe the Stalin administration was actually dreaming of or working to achieve a Communist take over of the American government. So what? It doesn't mean he had a snowball's chance in hell. It just means he didn't understand America. The world political situation in the fifties was no more than a rivalry, "cold war" between two superpowers for spheres of influence. For reasons of gaining power and control, the American right cast it as a war of ideologies. If Liberals are "pinkos" and pinkos are traitors, then Conservatives become heroes, saving the country from the enemy in an ersatz WWII scenario.
Just look at how they behaved recently. They specialize in achieving their political goals through fear and paranoia. Even a common sense issue like health care reform becomes fear fodder; the government is going to come between you and your doctor. They're going to limit your choices. They will delay or deny you coverage- as if private insurance was already doing all that.
That's all they ever do- tell us what to be afraid of.
Dalton Trumbo was a communist. Dalton Trumbo got fired by the studios for being a communist.
Whereupon the studios went on employing him under a pseudonym.
In 1960 Kirk Douglas ended the charade by putting Trumbo's name on "Spartacus."
At this remove, we can see that a lot of the witch hunt was overblown. (But look at the bright side; nobody got loaded in trucks and driven off to a concentration camp. That happened in the 1942-1945 period under the Roosevelt Administration, when Americans with the wrong ethnicity got stripped of their possessions and hustled off to barbed wire enclaves in the desert.)
Last year we had folks yelling: "Country First!" and suggesting that anyone who didn't support the Commander in Chief was borderline traitorous. Now, because the same crowd doesn't like the new Commander in Chief, not supporting same is the highest form of patriotism.
Pardon me while I adjust my neck for whiplash
"Destroying people's lives because of a past association of a movement
People's lives were not ruined merely because of a past association. You are grossly misinformed. People's lives were "ruined" when they revealed that they had allegiances to a communist cause that were a priority over their allegiance to their nation.
Elia Kazan was a member of the communist party, and he told the HUAC what they wanted to know. Because he believed in the cause of shining a light on communist causes in the nation at a time when espionage was at an all time high(because of the H bomb).
He wasn't blacxk listed by the HUAC.
It was in the decades afterwards when he was black listed - by liberal jackasses in hollywood who blocked hi lifetime achievement Oscar over a dozen times until he finally received it. You howl in here about how unfair it is for an actor to suffer for their political affiliations and the fact of the matter is that Kazan did suffer for his political stands. He agreed with the anti communist effort and hollywood never forgave him and wanted to punish him.
Not long ago, two liberal writers at the Sony lot started a campaign and successfully had Robert Montgomery's name was taken off a building because he was a "friendly witness" to the HUAC.
I guess that kind of blacklisting doesn't count when you want to discuss the issue huh?
This is the type of limited intelligence that Beck and Limbaugh thrive on. Thank you, Arlo, for the demonstration.
Now be a proud teabagger and tell everyone your full name so we can avoid you and your rantings.
Arlo-
You have such a warped view on what it means to be an American, and the concept of freedom and liberty. Under your conception, America should not be a free country.
1) It's not illegal to be a member of a political party, even the Communist party, if that's what a person wants to be. It's a little thing called freedom of association. Freedom. The thing America was built on. The freedom to believe what you want to believe. And it's guaranteed in the Constitution.
2) Kazan indeed did what the HUAC wanted him to do--he named names. He named people who had had a past association with the Communist party, and who were certainly not Soviet spies, who had done nothing illegal, or any such nonsense. He ruined people's lives by enabling the HUAC to deny them their American freedoms and liberties, and unjustly tarnish their reputations.
Nowhere is it documented in any way that those accused by HUAC had "an allegiance to a communist cause over their nation." Total absurdity. Again, for most of those accused, by the 50's, involvement in the communist party was a distant memory from decades before.
By contrast, today's teabagging movement has some serious anti-American undertones. In addition to disrespecting the office of the Presidency, there are some (like the governor of Texas) who have called for secession from the Union. How deeply anti-American. I would say he's a borderline traitor, and if he pursues that action, he should be captured and tried for treason, along with his co-conspirators.
Furthermore, there have been unsubtle calls for violence in the teabagging movement, and that is NOT protected by the Constitution. Are you now, or have you ever been, a member of the teabagging movement, Arlo?
Arlo, I love your folk-singing, but your politics? ... not quite so much. However, a couple of points:
It was in the decades afterwards when he was black listed - by liberal jackasses in hollywood who blocked hi lifetime achievement Oscar over a dozen times until he finally received it. ... He agreed with the anti communist effort and hollywood never forgave him and wanted to punish him.
Lessee. "[Kazan] agreed with the anti communist effort and hollywood never forgave him" ... "liberal jackasses in hollywood ... block his lifetime achievement Oscar ... until he finally received it."
Uh, Earth to Arlo. Kazan received it., championed by the liberal Martin Scorcese who stood behind him on the academy stage as Kazan read his acceptance speech.
Not long ago, two liberal writers at the Sony lot started a campaign and successfully had Robert Montgomery's name was taken off a building because he was a "friendly witness" to the HUAC
Explain to me how removing the name of a dead actor from an old building on an older movie lot is similar to running somebody out of an industry. I must be missing something.
Not long ago, a bunch of conservatives started a campaign to put the notorious conservative Ronald Reagan's name on a Washington Airport and various large Washington buildings. And they were successful.
It's truly awful, but why should I give a shit about this either?
One last point about Kazan:
He wasn't reviled so much because he named names (lots of people did that). He was reviled because he took out an ad in the NY Times bragging about it, rubbing everybody's nose in it.
Just so we're clear.
The problem with most conservatives is they've not read the Constitution, nor understand that it's a DELIBERATELY SECULAR document. They've mixed religion with politics until they're one. We do not, nor do we want to live in a theocracy.
"christianity," and most theist religions, are inherently anti-Democratic, and therefore anti-U.S. Constitution. Practicing a religion as a personal excercise is fine. But thrusting it upon the majority of U.S. Citizens is as bad as the Taliban thrusting it upon theirs.
Fundamentalism in America is, and always has been a FAR greater threat to our freedoms than Communism. And far more violent, too.
Oh God. Arlo the troll is back?
I thought he was too busy downloading movies to post here anymore.
Do us all a favor Arlo...
Shhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh!
Uh, Earth to Arlo. Kazan received it."
And thats a good thing, but what isn't said is that he was up for it about ten times before that, and every time he was passed over - with the reason being that he cooperated with the HUAC.
He should not have been passed over at all, and especially not for that reason.
"
Not long ago, a bunch of conservatives started a campaign to put the notorious conservative Ronald Reagan's name on a Washington Airport ... It's truly awful"
I love when the mask slips Steve and you reveal yourself to have typical, hollywood, delusional, far left views. If you think Ronald Reagan was a 'notorious' man and giving him the similar recognition as every other two term president (not to mention his ending of the cold war), then you stand on the wrong side of history.
You bemoan the efforts against communism and ridicule the president that had the most effect on toppling the russian communist state. Because you pretend the ugly truth about communism don't exist:
That it is and always has been a boot on the face of humanity and in the modern age, its responsible for hundreds of millions of dead bodies in ditches - a higher toll of death and suffering than any religious cause. Defending communism is like defending Nazism.
"By contrast, today's teabagging movement has some serious anti-American undertones. In addition to disrespecting the office of the Presidency"
OMG!! ITS AN OUTRAGE!
Where have yo been for the last eight years? Name ONE incident of disrespecting the office of the presidency during this president's term that even comes close to the ignorant moronic barrage of insults, threats and 'disrespect' that went on during Bush's.
You are exactly as I categorized you. One who puts his party before his country. If the nation's elected leader makes decisions you don't agree with , then the nation doesn't represent you. And its a HUGE injustice. Because you never grew up. You are partial to victimizing yourself and temper tantrums.
Guess what? Every single minute of every single day has someone in this nation disagreeing with what the elected leader is doing no matter who they are.
What makes you so different? You feel different? You think you're special because your mommy told you so?
People disagree with every president.
Our last president you wished ill will towards because you didn't agree with him and you meet any opposition towards the current president with righteous indignation.
You're a child. A clown.
ronald reagun was a terrorist--selling arms to terrorists to fund an illegal war in Central America and lying about it.
Thankfully, he's burning in hell now, sitting right next to his hero Saddam Hussein, and saving seats for bush and darth cheney.
Don't forget that according to Reagan, "Nicaragua was a threat to the USs national security". what a load of crap!
Dead bodies?
May I remind arlo about Hiroshima and Nagasaki? How about the massacres in East Timor, with the support of the US?
People with conservative views have no fear at all of broadcasting their views and their religion/superstitions to the rest of the people. Bible study everyone?
On top of that, they like to portray themselves as the victims.
What a load of crap!
Effing typical.
rufus
reagun was scum. But I sure wished there were pictures from his affair (yes) with Tyrone Power.
May I remind arlo about Hiroshima and Nagasaki?
Careful. You're using a subject to prove a point without knowing jack squat about said subject and if you start bemoaning the death toll of those events, then I'll just have to post the important historical facts that you are too ignorant to know. Thus making you look like more of a ranting raving foolish child.
If thats possible.
FREE MUMIA!!
You bemoan the efforts against communism and ridicule the president that had the most effect on toppling the russian communist state. Because you pretend the ugly truth about communism don't exist ...
Arlo?? The transmission seems to be breaking up, because you don't seem to get sarcasm when you read it.
I voted for Ronald Reagan, folk-singer boy.
You're so busy launching your bromides circa 1954, that you miss what I've been freaking saying: Fear is often the driver for conniving politicians (Left and Right) and capitalists.
Period.
And those awful communists that seem to have you wetting your bed in abject terror? The ones that killed Our Boys in Korea? They got themselves recognized by Richard Nixon and every politician since. The Chinese communists now own us.
Ever notice how Right Wing Republicans often rail about the horrid Cuban regime but have nothing to say about the Chinese? Guess why that is.
M-O-N-E-Y.
And as I've said here numerous times, when the Roberts court makes it legal for corporations to contribute directly to American elections (and the SCOTUS will), you'll get the Red Chinese army -- which runs and controls any number of international coporations -- buying American politicians.
All this will be courtesy of the Sons and Daughters of Nixon and Reagan, both of them Republicans, last time I checked.
So why don't you focus on THAT, guitar strummer, instead of nattering on about the HUAC in the long-ago age of McCarthy, and whether Robert Montgomery has his name removed from a crumbling building in Culver City?
Cripes.
to arlo:
"Careful. You're using a subject to prove a point without knowing jack squat about said subject and if you start bemoaning the death toll of those events, then I'll just have to post the important historical facts that you are too ignorant to know. Thus making you look like more of a ranting raving foolish child"
You think you're the only one with history books on his shelf?
It's easy to demonize the "others". And "fear" is always used as a tool to control people.
And off course whoever does not agree with you, you insult, and demonize and accuse them of supporting the "other", of being anti-american. We are just calling your bullshit, and you don't like it! Who's the whining baby now?
r.
reagun had little to do with toppling the Russian State. They were broke. End of story. And reagun was hell bent on breaking the U.S., which he's done. Took Presdident Clinton to bring us out of that hole, only to have a shit like bush and darth cheney to put us back in it, deeper than before.
No, reagun was one evil sonofabitch. Glad he's dead.
Dude, you guys. Arlo is a TROLL.
DONT FEED THE TROLLS!!!
Ever notice how Right Wing Republicans often rail about the horrid Cuban regime but have nothing to say about the Chinese? Guess why that is.
No Steve. The railing about the Cuban regime is there because the nation was taken over by communist forces and anyone deemed unfriendly to their cause were ejected from the nation(if they were lucky), imprisoned or killed. What you have is a free society that was trampled and subjugated by communists.
China on the other hand was never free. It was always under a totalitarian rule.
There's also the slight difference in that Cuba had missiles pointed at the US - and as recently disclosed documents reveal, Castro wanted to pull the trigger but Russia ordered him not to.
Thats the difference.
But let me give the floor to the mental midgets that think that Truman was a war criminal for dropping the H Bomb on Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Lets let the idiots talk. They are so smug and so stupid they didn't even learn from John Stewart, who apologized when he suggested the very same thing.
Please look into the subject before you spout off about it.
The US dropped Atomic Bombs, not H Bombs ARLO!
And it remains the only country in the world to have dropped nuclear weapons on civilians to this date.
But I guess it's ok to Arlo to kill japanese civilians.
rufus.
Hey, Arlo, it's JON Stewart.
NMow when do you aplogize for being an egotistical douchebag?
Post a Comment