Originally posted by lazs2
urchin and momus... allmost all of the movies nominated for awards this year had a leftist or homosexual or bizzare sexual theme. You seem unable to admit this.
Ok Lazs, why don't you give us a quick run through this years nominees and tell us why
you (not Coulter) think they are designed to advance the agenda you are claiming exists. Once you've done that, maybe you can tell us what all the other gay/liberal agenda movies are that you claim exist but have so far failed to name.
I say that Hollywood left gets 67 million hits and that Hollywood right has allmost none.
Great, and anyone with half a brain is laughing at you if you think that is any kind of valid method of data collection.
I say that no books are made that say hollywood leans two far to the right yet dozens are written that say the opposite...
All that proves is that writing books that cater to the prejudices of paranoid reactionaries is a lucrative business, or did you think Coulter writes her garbage out of altruism?
I say that no one in hollywood will say that hollywood is not leftist or left leaning.... shukins points out that they even brag about "breaking new ground" with all hommo movies and it is a fact that no other movie than brokebutt mountain ever recieved so many awards from so many people who never seen it.
Brokeback got awards from people who had never even seen it? Source? And what are all these other "homo" movies that no-one is forcing anyone to go and watch? Titles?
I say that hollywood raises vast amounts of money for democrats and left leaning causes but little for conservative ones. I say that 85% of comedians are liberal... I say that all this taints the work that these people do.
And yet when asked, you can't even list the films that you think are thus tainted other than a tiny percentage of total output based on a list drawn up by somebody else.
I believe that all this is so obvious to most people that it is just accepted..
Which means absolutely nothing in itself. 70% of Americans are said to have erroneously believed that Iraq was behind the 9/11 attacks. Are you saying that they were right all along?
Coulter writes that the films nominated have agendas that are leftist... she says how and she is right. she writes a book talking about the Hollywood left and she is probly correct on that too.... I have only read parts of it and I am sure that momus or urchin have read none of it.
I don't need to read Coulter to know that she is talking nonsense; I just need to look at the list of nominees over the last few decades or so. Why don't you do the same and list all these gay liberal movies that are nominated year after year?
I offer to name 5 lefties in hollywood for every right winger momus or urchin can name. I now offer to read any book that disputes that hollywood is leftist and would be especialy interested in any book or even article... that claims hollywood is conservative.
You can name as many hollywood liberals as you like; you still can't list any significant number of films that promote this agenda you claim exists..
that is the point that you are still trying to dodge.
In the "we only went to iraq for the oil" arguement. There are ample examples of papers and even books that support and refute it. I would say that none claim that it is that simple tho.
And yet you're more than happy to assign a similarly simplistic argument to a complex situation in this case when it satisifies your prejudices?
With hollywood... no one claims it is not leftist... only degree is in question and... for sake of this arguement... how much it taints the work done by said leftists.
Good, so why don't you just get on with proving how you think most of Hollywood is trying to advance a gay/liberal agenda via it's actual output by actually describing any significant number of the films in question, you know, like I've been asking you to do all along?
