Reagan Mini-Series Stirs Controversy Before It Airs
10-22-03 | 01:40 PM
#102
DVD Talk Platinum Edition
Joined: Sep 2002
Posts: 3,639
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally posted by X
That's what I thought at first too. But after reading the bolded part it appears some people in this thread (as well as the TV show) are promoting Reagan for sainthood.
That's what I thought at first too. But after reading the bolded part it appears some people in this thread (as well as the TV show) are promoting Reagan for sainthood.
"Those who live in sin shall die in sin!"
as if he actually said that?
That TV show is promoting a guy for Sainthood? Or am I misreading your sarcasm here? If that's the case, I'm sorry for the question.
Also - what have posters on this group said that sounded like lavish praise on Reagan? I see lots of posts discussing what he did, but not any praise not backed up with evidenciary support.
10-22-03 | 01:46 PM
#103
DVD Talk Legend
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 10,909
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From: Capitol of the Empire! Center of all Commerce and Culture! Crossroads of Civilization! NEW ROME!!!...aka New York City
http://www.andrewsullivan.com/
Drew Sullivan, respected author and conservatisms best champion on gay rights on the Regan pic:
BTW, your comparing 16,000 AIDS deaths that he had no direct hand in with the MILLIONS he saved by forcing the corrupt ideology of worldwide Communism into bankrupcy? Seriously, get some perspective here.
Drew Sullivan, respected author and conservatisms best champion on gay rights on the Regan pic:
THE REAGAN PIC: My view: judging by the script, a depressing attempt by one bitter faction to malign a former president. The misguided notion that he was an anti-gay fanatic who rejoiced at the AIDS epidemic has become a staple of left-liberal discourse; but the best students of the period accuse him of negligence not malice. There's a difference. http://www.dynamist.com/weblog/archives/000627.html gets it just about right.
BTW, your comparing 16,000 AIDS deaths that he had no direct hand in with the MILLIONS he saved by forcing the corrupt ideology of worldwide Communism into bankrupcy? Seriously, get some perspective here.
Last edited by Tommy Ceez; 10-22-03 at 01:50 PM.
10-22-03 | 07:32 PM
#105
Banned
Joined: Jul 2003
Posts: 154
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From: The Land Of The "Governator"
Originally posted by natesfortune
Perspective seems to be scarce these days.
Perspective seems to be scarce these days.
About ten hours ago, you stated, "But like I said - this is not based on fact, just conjecture. I'll get some sources and see what's up when I get home from work."
Hmm. 10 hours. You must be having a long day.
You might as well cut the bullshit about 'proof' and 'sources', because you don't have any. At least no more than anyone here has. So get off your damn pedistal.
Demanding 'proof' and 'evidence' from everyone else while providing none yourself just makes you look like an arrogant prick.
And, yeah, yeah, yeah. I can see your response now. "You just call me names because you have no proof and no evidence". We've heard that bit, save it............
10-22-03 | 07:35 PM
#106
Banned
Joined: Jul 2003
Posts: 154
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From: The Land Of The "Governator"
Originally posted by Tommy Ceez
http://www.andrewsullivan.com/
Drew Sullivan, respected author and conservatisms best champion on gay rights on the Regan pic:
BTW, your comparing 16,000 AIDS deaths that he had no direct hand in with the MILLIONS he saved by forcing the corrupt ideology of worldwide Communism into bankrupcy? Seriously, get some perspective here.
http://www.andrewsullivan.com/
Drew Sullivan, respected author and conservatisms best champion on gay rights on the Regan pic:
BTW, your comparing 16,000 AIDS deaths that he had no direct hand in with the MILLIONS he saved by forcing the corrupt ideology of worldwide Communism into bankrupcy? Seriously, get some perspective here.
Oh boy. Where to start. Oh nevermind, it's a waste of time...........
10-22-03 | 09:03 PM
#107
DVD Talk Platinum Edition
Joined: Sep 2002
Posts: 3,639
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
[QUOTE]Originally posted by FranksAndBeans
Uh hu.....
About ten hours ago, you stated, "But like I said - this is not based on fact, just conjecture. I'll get some sources and see what's up when I get home from work."
Hmm. 10 hours. You must be having a long day.
You might as well cut the bullshit about 'proof' and 'sources', because you don't have any. At least no more than anyone here has. So get off your damn pedistal.[QUOTE]
This coming from a guy who's sole source of evidence to back up his claims is:
"I was there, and I remember what happened. That's ALL the proof I need."
Wow, what balls you have.
I know you have trouble comprehending things, but like I told you before, I work 60 hours per week. And that's an average. My company has a new catalog that we are mailing THIS WEEK to over 10,000 people, so the work will be a bit longer, okay?
And I know you don't think "rich guys" work hard and won't believe this either.
But I promise you, keep your eyes on this page - I WILL DELIVER SOURCES FOR WHAT I SAID. And I'm prepared to say that unequivocally, so two days from now, if I haven't, you can roast me all you want.
Are YOU prepared to take such responsibility for YOURSELF? Probably not, seeing as how not only will you not quote a source for anything, you won't even offer any bit of evidence that's NON-SOURCED for your ridiculous claims.
I won't save it, because it's perfectly valid. Not only did I give out facts, I took responsibility for myself and said I'd source them as soon as I got the chance, in a week where free time and sleep are in short supply, no less.
What have you offered?
And by the way, it's very obvious that you're attempting to marginalize me as a way to position yourself where you don't have to answer a single point I've raised or offer any evidence for yourself.
It ain't gonna work. I'm too good at showing everybody just how full of hot air you are. And you're too good at not having a coherent reply enough to stop me.
Uh hu.....
About ten hours ago, you stated, "But like I said - this is not based on fact, just conjecture. I'll get some sources and see what's up when I get home from work."
Hmm. 10 hours. You must be having a long day.
You might as well cut the bullshit about 'proof' and 'sources', because you don't have any. At least no more than anyone here has. So get off your damn pedistal.[QUOTE]
This coming from a guy who's sole source of evidence to back up his claims is:
"I was there, and I remember what happened. That's ALL the proof I need."
Wow, what balls you have.
I know you have trouble comprehending things, but like I told you before, I work 60 hours per week. And that's an average. My company has a new catalog that we are mailing THIS WEEK to over 10,000 people, so the work will be a bit longer, okay?
And I know you don't think "rich guys" work hard and won't believe this either.
But I promise you, keep your eyes on this page - I WILL DELIVER SOURCES FOR WHAT I SAID. And I'm prepared to say that unequivocally, so two days from now, if I haven't, you can roast me all you want.
Are YOU prepared to take such responsibility for YOURSELF? Probably not, seeing as how not only will you not quote a source for anything, you won't even offer any bit of evidence that's NON-SOURCED for your ridiculous claims.
And, yeah, yeah, yeah. I can see your response now. "You just call me names because you have no proof and no evidence". We've heard that bit, save it............
What have you offered?
And by the way, it's very obvious that you're attempting to marginalize me as a way to position yourself where you don't have to answer a single point I've raised or offer any evidence for yourself.
It ain't gonna work. I'm too good at showing everybody just how full of hot air you are. And you're too good at not having a coherent reply enough to stop me.
10-22-03 | 09:11 PM
#108
DVD Talk Platinum Edition
Joined: Sep 2002
Posts: 3,639
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally posted by FranksAndBeans
Oh boy. Where to start. Oh nevermind, it's a waste of time...........
Oh boy. Where to start. Oh nevermind, it's a waste of time...........
You're too funny, guy.
You would've mastered the art of arguing without having to offer any support for your argument if you made any sense.
So let's look at what you've done here:
Called somebody else who linked an actual article for support a "waste of time". A handy little way to try and appear like you're too good to argue, and you still don't have to face the fact that you have nothing but emotion and partisanship on your side - not actual support for what you believe.
But what does the boy do? Does he change his mind so he won't have to stay wrong? No. Does he find reasons he can articulate and/or cite to say why he's right? No. Does he argue the other guy, point by point, with facts and logic, to refute the other guy's points and provide a foundation for his own belief? No.
A sensible person would thus say that this man must then change his mind, or otherwise, he's essentially CHOSEN to be ignorant.
I wonder what a sensible person might say about FranksandBeans?
Hmmm...
10-22-03 | 09:44 PM
#109
DVD Talk Legend
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 10,909
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From: Capitol of the Empire! Center of all Commerce and Culture! Crossroads of Civilization! NEW ROME!!!...aka New York City
BTW, Andrew Sullivan, who wrote that quick piece in support of Regan is HIV+
10-22-03 | 09:53 PM
#110
Originally posted by natesfortune
It ain't gonna work. I'm too good at showing everybody just how full of hot air you are. And you're too good at not having a coherent reply enough to stop me.
It ain't gonna work. I'm too good at showing everybody just how full of hot air you are. And you're too good at not having a coherent reply enough to stop me.
10-22-03 | 09:57 PM
#111
Originally posted by Tommy Ceez
BTW, Andrew Sullivan, who wrote that quick piece in support of Regan is HIV+
BTW, Andrew Sullivan, who wrote that quick piece in support of Regan is HIV+
Do you pronounce Reagan as "Reegun" or "Raygun"?
10-22-03 | 10:09 PM
#113
Moderator
Originally posted by X
Ok, I have to ask because I'm still working on a hypothesis...
Do you pronounce Reagan as "Reegun" or "Raygun"?
Ok, I have to ask because I'm still working on a hypothesis...
Do you pronounce Reagan as "Reegun" or "Raygun"?
Hey, I remember that hypothesis.
10-22-03 | 10:40 PM
#114
Banned
Joined: Jul 2003
Posts: 154
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From: The Land Of The "Governator"
Originally posted by natesfortune
This coming from a guy who's sole source of evidence to back up his claims is:
"I was there, and I remember what happened. That's ALL the proof I need."
Wow, what balls you have.
This coming from a guy who's sole source of evidence to back up his claims is:
"I was there, and I remember what happened. That's ALL the proof I need."
Wow, what balls you have.
Originally posted by natesfortune
I know you have trouble comprehending things, but like I told you before, I work 60 hours per week. And that's an average. My company has a new catalog that we are mailing THIS WEEK to over 10,000 people, so the work will be a bit longer, okay?
And I know you don't think "rich guys" work hard and won't believe this either.
I know you have trouble comprehending things, but like I told you before, I work 60 hours per week. And that's an average. My company has a new catalog that we are mailing THIS WEEK to over 10,000 people, so the work will be a bit longer, okay?
And I know you don't think "rich guys" work hard and won't believe this either.
Originally posted by natesfortune
Are YOU prepared to take such responsibility for YOURSELF? Probably not, seeing as how not only will you not quote a source for anything, you won't even offer any bit of evidence that's NON-SOURCED for your ridiculous claims.
Are YOU prepared to take such responsibility for YOURSELF? Probably not, seeing as how not only will you not quote a source for anything, you won't even offer any bit of evidence that's NON-SOURCED for your ridiculous claims.
Originally posted by natesfortune
I won't save it, because it's perfectly valid. Not only did I give out facts, I took responsibility for myself and said I'd source them as soon as I got the chance, in a week where free time and sleep are in short supply, no less.
I won't save it, because it's perfectly valid. Not only did I give out facts, I took responsibility for myself and said I'd source them as soon as I got the chance, in a week where free time and sleep are in short supply, no less.
Originally posted by natesfortune
And by the way, it's very obvious that you're attempting to marginalize me as a way to position yourself where you don't have to answer a single point I've raised or offer any evidence for yourself.
It ain't gonna work. I'm too good at showing everybody just how full of hot air you are. And you're too good at not having a coherent reply enough to stop me.
And by the way, it's very obvious that you're attempting to marginalize me as a way to position yourself where you don't have to answer a single point I've raised or offer any evidence for yourself.
It ain't gonna work. I'm too good at showing everybody just how full of hot air you are. And you're too good at not having a coherent reply enough to stop me.
Keep on describing YOURSELF...........
10-22-03 | 10:42 PM
#115
Banned
Joined: Jul 2003
Posts: 154
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From: The Land Of The "Governator"
Originally posted by natesfortune
LOL
You're too funny, guy.
You would've mastered the art of arguing without having to offer any support for your argument if you made any sense.
So let's look at what you've done here:
Called somebody else who linked an actual article for support a "waste of time". A handy little way to try and appear like you're too good to argue, and you still don't have to face the fact that you have nothing but emotion and partisanship on your side - not actual support for what you believe.
But what does the boy do? Does he change his mind so he won't have to stay wrong? No. Does he find reasons he can articulate and/or cite to say why he's right? No. Does he argue the other guy, point by point, with facts and logic, to refute the other guy's points and provide a foundation for his own belief? No.
A sensible person would thus say that this man must then change his mind, or otherwise, he's essentially CHOSEN to be ignorant.
I wonder what a sensible person might say about FranksandBeans?
Hmmm...
LOL
You're too funny, guy.
You would've mastered the art of arguing without having to offer any support for your argument if you made any sense.
So let's look at what you've done here:
Called somebody else who linked an actual article for support a "waste of time". A handy little way to try and appear like you're too good to argue, and you still don't have to face the fact that you have nothing but emotion and partisanship on your side - not actual support for what you believe.
But what does the boy do? Does he change his mind so he won't have to stay wrong? No. Does he find reasons he can articulate and/or cite to say why he's right? No. Does he argue the other guy, point by point, with facts and logic, to refute the other guy's points and provide a foundation for his own belief? No.
A sensible person would thus say that this man must then change his mind, or otherwise, he's essentially CHOSEN to be ignorant.
I wonder what a sensible person might say about FranksandBeans?
Hmmm...
It would appear that you are having far too much fun arguing with yourself, so, please, DO continue. You're still full of shit.....
10-22-03 | 10:44 PM
#116
Banned
Joined: Jul 2003
Posts: 154
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From: The Land Of The "Governator"
Originally posted by X
Let's keep the discussion away from attacking the individual and more on the argument.
Let's keep the discussion away from attacking the individual and more on the argument.
10-22-03 | 11:53 PM
#117
DVD Talk Platinum Edition
Joined: Sep 2002
Posts: 3,639
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally posted by X
Let's keep the discussion away from attacking the individual and more on the argument.
Let's keep the discussion away from attacking the individual and more on the argument.
10-23-03 | 08:41 AM
#118
DVD Talk Legend
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 10,909
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From: Capitol of the Empire! Center of all Commerce and Culture! Crossroads of Civilization! NEW ROME!!!...aka New York City
BTW, Andrew Sullivan, who wrote that quick piece in support of Regan is HIV+
So was Ryan White, what's your point?
Is every post responded by a flip 'what's your point'?
Were accusing ReAgan of being homophobic and reveling in the AIDS epedemic, so I bring to his defence a gay, HIV+ commentator, AND I AM TOLD SO WHAT!!!
WHAT F**KING PLANET ARE WE ON?
10-23-03 | 02:25 PM
#120
DVD Talk Legend
Joined: Apr 2002
Posts: 18,542
Received 445 Likes
on
314 Posts
From: Formerly known as Groucho AND Bandoman/Death Moans, Iowa
Originally posted by Geofferson
Reagan's biographer - his name slips my mind at the moment - said that several of the accusations portrayed in the mini-series were never documented as truthful (e.g. his statement "those that live in sin shall die in sin" referring to gays)
Reagan's biographer - his name slips my mind at the moment - said that several of the accusations portrayed in the mini-series were never documented as truthful (e.g. his statement "those that live in sin shall die in sin" referring to gays)
10-23-03 | 02:32 PM
#121
DVD Talk Legend
Joined: May 1999
Posts: 19,749
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From: Right of Atilla The Hun
On "Hardball with Chris Matthews" two days ago, the host asked Mr. Reagan's campaign manager and two of the president's biographers if they were contacted by CBS to verify the historical authenticity of the film. Strategist Ed Rollins and biographers Lou Cannon and Martin Anderson all stated that they had not been consulted. On the program, these authorities of the Reagan presidency debunked the movie's depiction of Ronald Reagan as callous to AIDS, oversimplistic in labeling people "commies" and accommodating to his wife's alleged consultations with an astrologer. These experts and other articles point out that the movie does not give him due credit for reversing the ascendancy of the Soviet Union, stimulating an economic recovery and making Americans proud again after the defeat in Vietnam and the discombobulation of the Carter administration.
http://www.washtimes.com/op-ed/20031...5634-4331r.htm
10-24-03 | 01:01 PM
#122
Banned
Joined: Jul 1999
Posts: 4,001
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From: PA
From Drudge, from the script:
The showcase line "Ketchup is a vegetable! It is not a meat, right? So IT IS a vegetable" is likely to become the "No wire hangers ever!" camp highlight of the season.
One camp scene shows Nancy and Ron both standing nude [wrapped in towels] when they first learn from NBC's John Chancellor they have won the election.
Pages 32, 33 of script:
INT. REAGANS' HOUSE -- PACIFIC PALISADES -- DAY
A FILM CREW is swarming all over the living room, setting up lights, cameras, etc. Reagan sits in the middle, putting on his own make-up.
INT. UPSTAIRS -- PATTI'S BEDROOM
Nancy arguing with Patti, (age 5), who won't come down.
NANCY: Come on, Patti. They're all set to go.
PATTI: No. I won't. I want to stay up here and play.
Nancy grits her teeth, and takes Patti by the wrist.
NANCY: No arguing. We're going down, right now.
PATTI: No! No! No! No! NO! NO!
Nancy reaches out, and slaps Patti. Patti reels, holding her cheek. Nancy
freezes.
*** Nancy is shown talking with her own mother in one flashback.
Page 16 of script:
NANCY'S STEP-FATHER: Nancy, I don't know what you see in Hollywood. As far as I can tell, it's nothing but Communists and drug addicts.
NANCY: It didn't used to be this bad -- did it, Mother?
NANCY'S MOTHER, EDITH: Hell, no. When I was here, it was just wall-to-wall Jews and queers.
****
President Reagan, played by James Brolin, is shown cursing his staff during one Oval Office meeting.
Pages. 152 of script:
REAGAN: "Rank amateur"! Who does that sonofabitch think he is? I'm the goddam President of the United States, I'm his boss!
****
The showcase line "Ketchup is a vegetable! It is not a meat, right? So IT IS a vegetable" is likely to become the "No wire hangers ever!" camp highlight of the season.
One camp scene shows Nancy and Ron both standing nude [wrapped in towels] when they first learn from NBC's John Chancellor they have won the election.
Pages 32, 33 of script:
INT. REAGANS' HOUSE -- PACIFIC PALISADES -- DAY
A FILM CREW is swarming all over the living room, setting up lights, cameras, etc. Reagan sits in the middle, putting on his own make-up.
INT. UPSTAIRS -- PATTI'S BEDROOM
Nancy arguing with Patti, (age 5), who won't come down.
NANCY: Come on, Patti. They're all set to go.
PATTI: No. I won't. I want to stay up here and play.
Nancy grits her teeth, and takes Patti by the wrist.
NANCY: No arguing. We're going down, right now.
PATTI: No! No! No! No! NO! NO!
Nancy reaches out, and slaps Patti. Patti reels, holding her cheek. Nancy
freezes.
*** Nancy is shown talking with her own mother in one flashback.
Page 16 of script:
NANCY'S STEP-FATHER: Nancy, I don't know what you see in Hollywood. As far as I can tell, it's nothing but Communists and drug addicts.
NANCY: It didn't used to be this bad -- did it, Mother?
NANCY'S MOTHER, EDITH: Hell, no. When I was here, it was just wall-to-wall Jews and queers.
****
President Reagan, played by James Brolin, is shown cursing his staff during one Oval Office meeting.
Pages. 152 of script:
REAGAN: "Rank amateur"! Who does that sonofabitch think he is? I'm the goddam President of the United States, I'm his boss!
****
10-25-03 | 01:20 AM
#123
DVD Talk Godfather
Joined: Apr 1999
Posts: 65,312
Received 2,705 Likes
on
1,603 Posts
From: Gateway Cities/Harbor Region
Al Rantel the openly Gay radio host on 790 KABC here in LA pointed out that Reagan had many Gays working for him while he was Gov of CA. They were called the "Gay Circle" by people who had a big problem with it. Apparently, the Administration took flack for it.
Rantel also pointed out that the 2 men producing this Bio-pic are openly gay and far left leaning. So the negative image of Reagan makes sense.
Rantel also pointed out that the 2 men producing this Bio-pic are openly gay and far left leaning. So the negative image of Reagan makes sense.
