posted
No that series showed EXCRUCIATING CONTEMPT because it showed Qui-Gon expressing Midichlorian Theory about three years BBY earlier than it was first referenced in archival texts
Posts: 15421 | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
So I saw the Imitation Game tonight, and I would very strongly recommend that absolutely anyone see it, if only because of how tremendously important Alan Turing's work was to both winning WWII and the technology we enjoy today.
It's an incredibly moving film about a friendless man who saves the world, and then is forgotten, reviled, chemically castrated and treated so horribly that he's driven to suicide. And then largely forgotten by the people he saved.
There's a beautiful scene at the end of the movie where Joan Clarke comes by his apartment and tells him about getting on a train in a town that wouldn't have existed if it wasn't for Turing cracking Enigma, buying a ticket from a man who would've probably been dead if it wasn't for him, working a job in a field that wouldn't have existed without him. And the movie closes with the estimate that Turing's work saved 14 million lives.
What's heartbreaking is knowing that conversation probably never happened. He went to his death hated by the country he saved, because he was different.
So of course OSC hates it, of course he calls it "deeply dishonest" and Oscar bait and pandering. Part of the liberal elitist gay agenda. Because he's the person who supports keeping laws against gays on the books - the same laws that drove Turing to suicide. And I shouldn't be disappointed or upset by that because I shouldn't have expected anything else. But what hurts is how Ender resembles Turing, how much of the pain you can see in Ender saving humanity only to vilified by it causes, and it kills me to know an author capable of writing such a brilliant, similar character can't even understand a movie about that character because he's a homosexual.
tl;dr go see Imitation Game. It's brilliant.
Posts: 2222 | Registered: Dec 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
Yeah, at first I was skeptical of the Hogwarts story line too, but after I heard "you're a wizard, Alan!" and saw how happy he was to get his wand, I was sold.
Posts: 2222 | Registered: Dec 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
The peculiar thing is that I'm sure enough that it would be a surprise to me to learn that Card actually harbored those sorts of thoughts about homosexuals as individuals, Dogbreath. It's been quite some time since he wrote the works I'm thinking of, but he was able to flesh out really human, noble, authentic characters for whom homosexuality wasn't some sort of defining trait worthy of criticism or condemnation by society or by God.
I do, however, based on much of his more recent non-fiction political commentary, think that he bitterly resents an anti-homosexual overall political or cultural stance being condemned. Of course in practical terms-such as being on NOM-that makes little difference. But for me, it serves as a partial explanation for the man's past work and present politics.
As for laws on the books, I don't recall what his stance is on that presently. I think he's cut a rather fine and not-straight (heh) line depending on who he's speaking to, and to what extent and which laws should be enforced, etc. But I don't think he has or would support laws such as came into effect against Turing.
Today, anyway. But many of the same ideas he espouses today about homosexuals were precisely the sort of thing that led to Turing's sentencing.
--------
I've also read that there is some uncertainty as to whether Turing's death was a suicide. He did after all work with cyanide, and did eat apples regularly. I suspect he did, but there is some thinking that goes that he chose a method that could look like an accident for the sake of his family-particularly his mother.
That struck me as especially potent, since I've had a distant family member commit suicide and a much closer one attempt it. Not for similar reasons, but it serves to show that human misery isn't something that comes without a cost. When it's society inflicting it on the individual, it's not just someone with hurt feelings.
Posts: 17164 | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
Rakeesh: I was quoting Card's review of Imitation game.
What he thinks of individual homosexuals I'm not sure (I've read his books and know he's written gay characters), and I didn't really think is relevant to what I said. He certainly doesn't like movies about them.
What's interesting in the movie is that there's nobody who acts as a mouthpiece for the director, nobody goes on a rant about how unfair Turing's treatment is (especially not him, who, if anything, acts like it's something he deserves, or is at least resigned to), nobody fights for him. Nor is he shown to be especially noble in is "struggle against the law." He's just systemically isolated and driven to suicide. And that's it. I fail to see how that makes it "deeply dishonest"... would he have preferred to have Turing hook up with Kiera Knightly and get married and live happily ever after having babies?
quote:he was able to flesh out really human, noble, authentic characters for whom homosexuality wasn't some sort of defining trait worthy of criticism or condemnation by society or by God.
And for whom actually acting out on those desires rather than suppressing them and or pairing up heterosexually n' having babies typically ends very badly, as a general reminder if we want to talk about how sympathetic these portrayals are :]
Posts: 15421 | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Yeah. I remember those characters being portrayed as having nobility because of their ability to overcome their natural inclination and stick it in a woman to have babies, thereby fulfilling the Purpose of Life.
At least, the one from the Homecoming series was like that.
Posts: 572 | Registered: Jun 2013
| IP: Logged |
quote:he was able to flesh out really human, noble, authentic characters for whom homosexuality wasn't some sort of defining trait worthy of criticism or condemnation by society or by God.
And for whom actually acting out on those desires rather than suppressing them and or pairing up heterosexually n' having babies typically ends very badly, as a general reminder if we want to talk about how sympathetic these portrayals are :]
posted
Dogbreath: Did we even read the same review?
From Mr. Card,
quote:And the movie is worth seeing, because the Ultra project at Bletchley Park is one of the towering intellectual and moral achievements in history -- and it may well have saved the world. Alan Turing was a real man who is worth remembering today -- we still speak of the Turing Test as the best way to evaluate artificial intelligence, and our entire computer culture is based at least partly on his work. This film, despite its flaws and dishonesties and formulas, is About Something, and the Something it's about does matter.
posted
Yes, of course we did. Didn't you see the part I quoted? He pretty much completely trashed the movie, and said it was only worth seeing because it's about something important. He, at different times, calls it deeply dishonest, contemptuous of history, full of lies, pandering, and Oscar-bait. I didn't just didn't pull those words out of thin air, I pulled them from his review.
Posts: 2222 | Registered: Dec 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
Also, you conveniently left out the prelude to his "something that matters", namely:
quote:
The writers, directors, producers and backers of award-bait movies went to the same film schools and swallowed the same bogus theories as those who make blockbusters, and the results can be just as hollow and dishonest. But because the “serious” films are often about something that matters (and no, the struggle of X-Men for acceptance does not actually matter in the real world; neither do the voyages of the starship Enterprise), the hollowness can hurt a little more. Case in point: The Imitation Game
quote:Originally posted by Dogbreath: Also, you conveniently left out the prelude to his "something that matters", namely:
quote:
The writers, directors, producers and backers of award-bait movies went to the same film schools and swallowed the same bogus theories as those who make blockbusters, and the results can be just as hollow and dishonest. But because the “serious” films are often about something that matters (and no, the struggle of X-Men for acceptance does not actually matter in the real world; neither do the voyages of the starship Enterprise), the hollowness can hurt a little more. Case in point: The Imitation Game
That's the second paragraph of the review, it doesn't precede the section I quoted.
And where in the review did he say,
quote:Part of the liberal elitist gay agenda
?
All of his criticisms of the film stem from the historiography. Because the film makers make stuff up because they think the actual history won't drum up enough emotion with the audience to get an Oscar nomination. But in fact what was actually at stake was more than enough to tell a compelling story.
He praises the acting, and heck he says,
quote:So along with a beautiful telling of the tale of Turing's childhood friendship with his first love, a kind boy named Christopher, the film spends the bulk of its time on bogus conflicts over Turing's struggle to get along with the other mathematicians working at Bletchley Park, constant down-to-the-wire attempts to shut down his code-breaking machine, and a search for a spy among the codebreakers.
Clearly he doesn't have a bee in his bonnet over homosexuality in this instance.
Posts: 1194 | Registered: Jun 2010
| IP: Logged |
posted
I would not want to be a gay man in OSC's books anymore than I'd want to be poor Carpenter. I wanted to take that guy out of the book, give him a hug and tell him, dude, you're not a worm because you're disabled! You're AWESOME!
Ugh, and that poor dude in Songmaster . Being gay doesn't even WORK like that!
Posts: 9942 | Registered: Mar 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
The liberal gay elitist agenda was sarcasm on my part.
But I get the impression that he's being so hard on the historicity because of the homosexuality. The movie isn't meant to be a documentary, but instead a story about a brilliant, lonely young man who's exiled from society and eventually driven to suicide because of bigotry. The history is largely right, but like all films it takes shortcuts or glosses over things in order to tell it's story. Not because it's trying to up the ante dramatically, but because it makes it easier to tell the story.
For that matter, there are no "constant down-to-the-wire attempts to shut down his code-breaking machine", there's one attempt to shut it down, and it's not "down to the wire" whatsoever. Likewise, the search for the spy isn't a big thriller chase, it's a background event, and is mainly there to intersect with Alan's story and describe his character: people are suspicious of him and he gets his office torn apart because he's so socially awkward, he seems a likely candidate for a spy. It's not particularly dramatic, either. I really recommend watching it so you could see how far off his other claims are.
Card has praised other movies that are far, far less historically accurate than this one. (which gets all the important details right) I really doubt he thinks the movie was destroyed by contemptuous misplacement of liquid paper and a failure to adequately explain minute details of cryptography. I think what bothers him is that the movie isn't formulaic in the way he wants it to be - Turing never falls in love with the female lead, it doesn't end with a happily ever after, and the hero doesn't get the praise, accolade and valediction he deserves. In fact, he still hasn't - there were people leaving the theater with me who had never heard of him until seeing the movie.
I recommend seeing it and contemplating why a man who supports keeping anti-homosexuality laws on the books would dislike it so much. Or just seeing it because it's a great movie, honestly.
Also, I said prelude, not preceding. His saying it was about something important at the end is reinforcing how awful and hollow and dishonest he thinks it is, a recap of the views he expressed at the beginning of the review.
Posts: 2222 | Registered: Dec 2008
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Synesthesia: I would not want to be a gay man in OSC's books anymore than I'd want to be poor Carpenter. I wanted to take that guy out of the book, give him a hug and tell him, dude, you're not a worm because you're disabled! You're AWESOME!
Ugh, and that poor dude in Songmaster . Being gay doesn't even WORK like that!
Hi Syn! Long time no see! Posts: 2222 | Registered: Dec 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
If Turing had just suppressed his homosexuality and devoted his life to getting a woman pregnant in the bonds of real not-dress-up marriage then Card wouldn't have had to have had such a problem with white-out that was anachronistic by a couple of years. Did you plebeians think of that?
Next up on Unkle Parkour Reviews Errything: I Am Suddenly A Huge Dickhole To J.K. Rowling For Reasons Certainly Not Related To That I Found Out That Dumbledore Boned Dudes
Posts: 805 | Registered: Jun 2009
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Dogbreath: But I get the impression that he's being so hard on the historicity because of the homosexuality. The movie isn't meant to be a documentary, but instead a story about a brilliant, lonely young man who's exiled from society and eventually driven to suicide because of bigotry.
Also: this.
It is possible that Card isn't being weird about this movie at least in part because of Turing's gayness. But he's so obvious and patterned sometimes that yall crazy if you don't think people are going to look at this and say "lol, classic Card".
Posts: 805 | Registered: Jun 2009
| IP: Logged |
quote:Card has praised other movies that are far, far less historically accurate than this one. (which gets all the important details right) I really doubt he thinks the movie was destroyed by contemptuous misplacement of liquid paper and a failure to adequately explain minute details of cryptography. I think what bothers him is that the movie isn't formulaic in the way he wants it to be
I'm sure he'd agree with this! Which is why he castigates Schindler's List in the same review. I'm sure even he'd agree that he is not completely consistent in his reviews. One day he's feeling pretty pissy about too much homework being assigned at school, and then he happens to watch "Accepted" on TV, and BOOM! A review. And maybe he likes a film he normally wouldn't. Oh wells?
But based on the things he actually complains about, I can buy that he actually doesn't like those things, and the homosexuality isn't bothering him. He *is* the sort of person where if somebody in the film said, "The Russians are our allies." He'd get fussy about it.
Posts: 1194 | Registered: Jun 2010
| IP: Logged |
posted
It's certainly possible, yes. It just seems his disapproval of it seems very predictable considering what it's about.
Also, the whole "the Russians are our allies" comment was made *by the spy* trying to plead with Alan not to reveal him, and it was made in late 1942 in the movie - i.e, during the battle of Stalingrad when the Russians most certainly *were* our allies. (Alan ends up revealing him anyway) There never was any search for a Nazi spy, they were always searching for a soviet spy, and the decision to allow him to stay was in order to pass misinformation to the soviets, which is absolutely something Ultra did. (it's revealed that MI6 is pre-inspecting everything he sends)
I don't want to get into every point, but literally every problem he had with the movie seems like he's stretching as much as possible to make minor errors (or even non-errors) into giant, stupid, arrogant blunders designed to pander to the Academy. The white-out comment is just the most obvious. And I feel like if you watch the movie you'll understand what I'm talking about.
Posts: 2222 | Registered: Dec 2008
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Parkour: If Turing had just suppressed his homosexuality and devoted his life to getting a woman pregnant in the bonds of real not-dress-up marriage then Card wouldn't have had to have had such a problem with white-out that was anachronistic by a couple of years. Did you plebeians think of that?
Next up on Unkle Parkour Reviews Errything: I Am Suddenly A Huge Dickhole To J.K. Rowling For Reasons Certainly Not Related To That I Found Out That Dumbledore Boned Dudes
The ironic thing was that Dumbledore boned zero dudes. He didn't get any witches pregnant, but hey, nobody's perfect.
Posts: 1757 | Registered: Oct 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
We can't say that Dumbledore boned zero dudes, only that the whole affair with Grindlewald was so traumatic for him that he probably boned no more.
There is PLENTY of dude boning time before then.
Why do I know this.
Posts: 805 | Registered: Jun 2009
| IP: Logged |
posted
Yes, Dumbledore was 150 when he died in 1996. So he would have been 99 when he dueled Grindlewald in 1945. Assuming he first started boning dudes around the age of 18, that's 81 years of dude boning to account for.
Posts: 2222 | Registered: Dec 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
For all that I dislike Card's general attitude toward gays, I'm not seeing it in that review. He rags on The Imitation Game for all the usual (often nonsensical) reasons he rags on other 'pretentious' movies or books. I really don't see a hint of anti-gay prejudice in this one. If he wanted to hate it because of teh gay, why recommend it at all?
quote:if the film increases our rapport with Asperger’s sufferers as well as lonely young homosexuals, I can’t think of that as harmful.
Ugh, and that poor dude in Songmaster . Being gay doesn't even WORK like that! [/qb]
Hi Syn! Long time no see! [/QB][/QUOTE]
! Waving smily! It's so cute!
I really hope Dumbledore had a nice, lovely man to snuzzle him some time in his life because it would have been depressing if he was like, I have terrible taste in men so I will just concentrate on my work rather than end up in the arms of some nice fellow. Posts: 9942 | Registered: Mar 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Dogbreath: Yes, Dumbledore was 150 when he died in 1996. So he would have been 99 when he dueled Grindlewald in 1945. Assuming he first started boning dudes around the age of 18, that's 81 years of dude boning to account for.
No, that's the thing. Dumbledore was in love with Grindlewald (inrequited) when they were obsessed with the deathly hallows. It was the death of his little sister at their hands that ended their friendship and scarred Dumbledore emotionally from forming relationships, long before the 1945 battle.
I remember hearing he was 150 in a Scholastic interview back in the day, but other things seem to point to an age of 115, not 150.
Posts: 1757 | Registered: Oct 2004
| IP: Logged |
I really hope Dumbledore had a nice, lovely man to snuzzle him some time in his life because it would have been depressing if he was like, I have terrible taste in men so I will just concentrate on my work rather than end up in the arms of some nice fellow.
I'm pretty sure that's what actually happened. Dumbledore could have hoarded all the wizard erotic capital if he wanted to.
Posts: 1757 | Registered: Oct 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Parkour: We can't say that Dumbledore boned zero dudes, only that the whole affair with Grindlewald was so traumatic for him that he probably boned no more.
There is PLENTY of dude boning time before then.
Why do I know this.
The Grindelwald thing happened right after Dumbledore graduated Hogwarts and the entire situation has to be a first relationship.
If Dumbledore were more experienced (HP fanfiction style, say) he'd be a lot more direct about his other intentions. He'd also be more likely to bounce back if he had serious loves at Hogwarts. And Rita Skeeter would have had them in her book too.
quote: One of the things I regard as sacred is the right to be rude and offensive in political print and speech. But apparently that aspect of liberal democracy isn’t sacred to Obama. At least, not enough for him to make even a tiny gesture in its support.
Why has he backed away from showing solidarity with the victims of Muslim terrorism? Because he and his America-hating Leftist friends decided, fifteen seconds after 9/11, that the worst danger was for Americans to get angry at Muslims in general.
I don't see why this is a bad thing, and it blows my mind why someone would think this is true.
Posts: 1757 | Registered: Oct 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
Man this latest article is like watching Ben Stein rant while his brain disintegrates. Everything is slathered in pathologically unsupportable hyperbole, Obama is a mustachioed supervillain waiting to use his urban black youths army or whatever to Quisling America over to our new simultaneously Muslim and secular overlords
Does anyone want to bother with a substantive point by point reply to this? Is anyone even really backing him up anymore outside of a vanishing fraction of hardcore right wingers who eat this stuff up like a Bircher quarterly?
Posts: 15421 | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Oh, that article? Don't you silly people read them at Rhino Times? They come out every Thursday and there's no paywall.
Posts: 1757 | Registered: Oct 2004
| IP: Logged |
1. There are two, by the same artist. One arrived during the 1960s, the other during George W. Bush's tenure.
2. The Bush bust WAS given back when Obama was inaugurated, because it was considered to be on loan and belonging specifically to Mr. Bush's presidency. Apparently this is standard practice among the people who deal with White House art and the new administration had nothing to do with it.
3. The 1960s bust is very much still there. The rep at the White House had no idea there was one that came and left, and one that's been there all along, and apparently, so do lots of other people.
posted
You're talking about a man who writes scathing "reviews" of movies he's never seen. (think of his several-article-spanning attack on Lincoln, for example) I somehow doubt fact checking plays a role in the articles he writes.
Posts: 2222 | Registered: Dec 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
I try to give people the benefit of the doubt.
For example, Obama or his people could have rejected renewing the loan, or Bush's guys just threw it in the box to give to the embassy and didn't say anything.
posted
Although it may be a perfectly fine book, I wouldn't say that a biography of Churchill by Boris Johnson (Conservative Mayor of London, probable future leader of the Conservative party, possible future Conservative Prime Minister, powers that be help us) is likely to be an unbiased, reliable source of information on old Winston.
Conservatives love Churchill even more than they adore Thatcher. They all grow up feeling like he's their grandpa.
Posts: 1528 | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by theamazeeaz: Oh, that article? Don't you silly people read them at Rhino Times? They come out every Thursday and there's no paywall.
You know, I actually liked his latest review (not posted on Hatrack yet) sans the obligatory "Obama hates America" bit, but there was one line that actually made me laugh out loud:
quote: I had no interest in American Sniper. The title made it sound too violent. I’ve read too much about war to want to see it close up.
I sure do feel bad for him, you know, with all that reading about war. Must be traumatic.
I realize that's kind of unfair to say, and I'm not trying to claim any sort of high ground here - my military service was relatively safe, boring and trauma free. It's just that as of late after transitioning into a civilian job I've come to realize the most valuable thing the military gives - perspective. It's sort of hard for me to care much about my coffee being made wrong, or traffic being bad, or my boss being unfair with performance reviews, or what Karen the receptionist thinks of me. And it's interesting to see that things that get people all bent out of shape don't really affect me at all. I'm not sure if that makes me numb or well adjusted, but either way I kind of like it. The blog just war things does a pretty good job of capturing this disconnect pretty well, and a lot of vets I know feel the same way - it's just kind of hard to be emotionally invested in relatively trivial things.
Which is actually why I recommend seeing American Sniper, because I don't think I've seen a movie that better captures that feeling. It's not the horrors of war that haunt Chris Kyle, it's the feeling that who he is back home isn't nearly as important, doesn't really matter much.
Posts: 2222 | Registered: Dec 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
Also, this. I started reading some of the comments and got through 2 or 3 before my brain started hurting. I have only myself to blame.
Posts: 2222 | Registered: Dec 2008
| IP: Logged |
Sometimes I wonder if people think that the soldiers fighting The War on Terror were out converting people to Christianity.
Posts: 1757 | Registered: Oct 2004
| IP: Logged |
Which is actually why I recommend seeing American Sniper, because I don't think I've seen a movie that better captures that feeling. It's not the horrors of war that haunt Chris Kyle, it's the feeling that who he is back home isn't nearly as important, doesn't really matter much.
In that vein, I'm curious what you thought of Sebastian Junger's War.
Posts: 1757 | Registered: Oct 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
Never read it. I'll check it out from the library (you can do that on your Kindle nowadays!) and read it this week. Posts: 2222 | Registered: Dec 2008
| IP: Logged |
I instantly liked his talking about the austere conditions. When I tell people about being in the Marines and talk about spending weeks sleeping on the ground in the same clothes, they all act sort of baffled. I think everybody assumes we went out for a few hours and then go back to a fully functional base with showers and cooks and stuff, when reality is more of 3 strands of C-wire, a tent and a generator for the gear we use (or a lot of times, just a lot of batteries), and if we're lucky some cots for days or sometimes weeks.
Posts: 2222 | Registered: Dec 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
Well I didn't bother with a point by point but I did make and disseminate something which is kind of how I feel about the whole of Orson Scott Card's political writings and I guess it's getting some traction. Not that anyone cares, because few people even bother to defend the guy anymore and just sort of sit around awkwardly silent hoping that we just won't talk about those insane things he writes, because it's awkward and embarrassing at this point even to try to suggest that he's not just saying completely nuts things or that even if he's arguing passionately about something it's still totally unfair to think he's not a nice guy because he would be soft-spoken if you met him in person or something
Posts: 15421 | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
You know, embarrassingly, I still read every article, every book, even sometimes his short stories. Why?
Well, growing up OSC influenced me more than almost any other author, save maybe Tolkien. Reading Ender's Game changed my entire perspective on the world when I was 12 years old. I know some people view it as a sort of power fantasy - the poor, misunderstood, genius child saves mankind and proves them all wrong. But foor me, it taught me patience. It taught me emotional control, how to assess social situations logically, how to try and see the motivations behind words and actions rather than evaluating everything at face value. Most importantly, it taught me empathy. For someone who had been a pretty sociopathic child, it taught me a lot about putting myself in another person's shoes and figuring out what makes him tick, why does he feel this way, why does he make the choices he does?
And that's something that used to resonate through all of OSC's work. He had a depth of understanding of human nature, and the remarkable ability to express it so clearly and simply that I could understand and relate to it as a child.
So I think about his old work and the Secular Humanist Revival Meetings and think about what a deep and profoundly human person he used to be, and I can't help but think that he's still that person. That this slide towards increasingly manic, unpredictable, radicalized political opinions and seemingly loose grip on the reality of American politics and society will reverse itself.
At this point even his books are starting to suffer as he pours more and more of his personal ideology into every one he writes. I mean, look at the difference between Ender in EG and EiE, the latter is almost unbearably obnoxious and arrogant in his absolute certainty that everything he does and thinks is right, the former is quiet, reserved, willing to watch and observe, introspective. And all of Card's protagonists have suffered the same transformation - from deeply empathetic, humble, flawed-but-beautiful characters to self righteous arrogant jerks who are inherently good and pure. I was actually excited when The Lost Gate came out because the protagonist is someone who's kind of an asshole and isn't perfect and does plenty of shady things to get by and doesn't lecture anybody on morality. Then by the sequel, he "gets better" and starts heading down to road to self-righteous-jerkdom.
But then I read Ender's Game or Speaker again, and it's still just as good. And I can't help but hope something will change and we'll get our old Card back. I don't expect him to change his political opinions or start liking Obama or even approve of gay marriage. Not demonizing everyone who disagrees with him on arbitrary political or artistic points would be enough. Not blatently inserting political or social opinions into everything would be enough. Having the empathy to realize that not everybody who disagrees with you is a lying elitist hollywood narcissist atheist abortionist America-hating Muslim loving history denying lazy millennial cowardly liberal would be enough.
Will this ever happen? No, it'll probably get worse, not better. Heck, just look at his political writings in early 2008 and compare them to his current opinions - he's gotten far more extreme in 7 years. And I'm honestly not sure how much longer I'll keep watching, because at some point it's no longer good for me to continue being disappointed week after week.
But for right now, I do think it's sad that so many of OSC's fans here are people who are immensely frustrated and disappointed with him. Which says something about how good his work used to be - it's hard to find many people who enjoyed his books but still agree with anything he says nowadays.
Posts: 2222 | Registered: Dec 2008
| IP: Logged |
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Frown]](frown.gif)
. Being gay doesn't even WORK like that!
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
![[Wave]](graemlins/wave.gif)
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
! Waving smily! It's so cute! ![[ROFL]](graemlins/rofl.gif)
![[Cry]](graemlins/cry.gif)
