comment #1

Matthew says ...

Another problem I've seen is that some tv ads for World Trade Center are now set to a Coldplay song. There is something kind of weird to me about attempting to turn a national tragedy hip by showing slow motion shots of destruction set to popular music. Maybe it's just me.

comment #2

NYCBusybody says ...

It's a corner that liberalism has backed itself into through it's own fault. Liberal ideas about the world today rely upon anti-Americanism - 9/11 was America's fault, not a terrorist act committed by anti-Semitic terrorists bent on world domination.

The fact that making a simple, non-controversial, non-political story focusing on the heroism of the day plays to conservatives is the fault of liberals, not George Bush. If Karl Rove can easily persuade people that liberals are unpatriotic, lily-livered America haters, it's because they themselves make it easy to do so.

comment #3

NYCBusybody says ...

It's quite telling that when you listen to the Kerry/Murtha/Pelosi/Sheehan/Oliver Stone quotes about 9/11 and terrorism, they are almost EXACT quotes, using even the exact same words, as Osama Bin Laden. Al Qaeda knew that the easiest way to win sympathy for their side would be to focus more on playing up Western liberal ideas as opposed to religious nutjob ideas, knowing it would obfuscate everything, fool Western far-lefties into thinking they're on Al Qaedas's and Iran's side, and weaken Western resolve.

comment #4

mike says ...

RE: The Coldplay song

I read on defamer.com today that a Pr firm had been hired to try and market the film towards teenagers, and youth, being that 9/11 is a young person's cultural touchstone, their Kennedy assassination or Challenger explosion, or something of that ilk.

Check it out on Defamer.

comment #5

YO, BLAIR! says ...

I am looking forward to seeing this flick -- you know, before Dubya officially starts WWW III and I have to quit my job and go fight the holy war.

comment #6

Zac Bertschy says ...

NYCBusybody: Yeah, I'm sure that has NOTHING to do with the fact that the right has been manipulating 9.11 for political gain since day one and invoke it every time they're in trouble or need to scare people.

Clearly, it's all the liberals' fault that anything considered "patriotic" is right-wing, since obviously the right hasn't completely comandeered the word, so it now means "completely supporting everything George Bush does and says and also being Christian" rather than simply "loving your country". Yeah, that's all the liberals fault.

comment #7

Abner says ...

It's quite telling that when you listen to the NYbusybody/Oliver North/Glen Beck/Powerline quotes about 9/11 and terrorism, they are almost EXACT quotes, using even the exact same words, as Adolph Hitler/(insert rightwing extremist scumbag name here).

comment #8

NYCBusybody says ...

I dunno. I'm an agnostic anti-theist, deeply pro-gay marriage, deeply pro-choice, firmly anti death penalty, and not a supporter of the Iraq War. I think Christian conservatism is the worst political development of the last 50 years. I'm no rightie.

I just think far-left extremism is equally dangerous, and since this is a far-left website, it should be stated here.

comment #9

NYCBusybody says ...

And besides, it's the far-lefties who are Hitler-esque, if anyone, in their deep anti-Semitism.

comment #10

Jack's Back says ...

Since when is this a far-left website?

Idiot.

comment #11

NYCBusybody says ...

"Clearly, it's all the liberals' fault that anything considered "patriotic" is right-wing".

Yes. Simple answer, yes.

comment #12

NYCBusybody says ...

It's Jeffrey's website, and I'm sure he considers himself far left politically. Even if he doesn't, the ideas he espouses and supports put him in that camp.

comment #13

Turdblossom says ...

Disagreeing with the incompetent chickenhawks who are running our great country into the ground does not make you "far-left" politically. I've voted republican before and I'll do it again I imagine. But these guys, they're out of control and dangerously clueless. Any way you slice it, we are substantially worse off than we were before Dubya took over.

But back to the purpose of this website -- discussing flicks. When are we going to see your full review for WTC, Jeff?

comment #14

NYCBusybody says ...

The incompetent chickenhawks have nothing to do with Islamic fundamentalism. There were more bombings during the Clinton Administration, when no one even know W existed. Hell, the WTC was even bombed in the early 90's, when Democrats controlled all of politics still.

That's what makes this left "extremism", this idea that this is about George W. Bush. Bush is nothing. Historically, he's insignificant. Osama Bin Laden doesn't give a damn if Howard Dean or George Bush is in power. And that's the reason that it's the Left, just as much as the Right, who have politicized 9/11 and the issue of terrorism.

comment #15

Lisa says ...

Jeff's probably a leftie. He doesn't like George Bush but then Nancy Reagan doesn't either. I wouldn't say that he was far left at all. Do you read much or do you just swallow all the shit that the mainstream conservative biased media shovel you?

comment #16

NYCBusybody says ...

The media is biased towards moderate left-wing political thought, which is exactly where I stand. The idea that being anti-terrorism and anti-Islamist is "conservative" to you, Lisa, is exactly what I'm talking about.

I hate George W. Bush with quite a passion. He's a political extremist. I'm just not attacking him on this site because that would be preaching to the choir.

comment #17

NYCBusybody says ...

And it's fun as hell to piss off anti-Semitic America haters who think they're "liberal" when they're really just brainwashed morons.

comment #18

Roddy Reta says ...

I think it's a smart move on the part of Paramount. Oliver Stone directing a 9/11 movie is probably something that many conservatives would take a pass on. And you're talking about half the moviegoers in this country at least. So it's good marketing, although I still think people don't want to see a movie with this type of content, no matter what the message.

comment #19

NYCBusybody says ...

"you're talking about half the moviegoers in this country at least."

Oh, I don't know about that. You're definitely talking about a little more than half the general population in the country, but moviegoers? Conservatives generally don't like Hollywood, so I'd have a tough time imagining half of the moviegoing population is conservative.

Liberals have movies/documentaries/New York Times, conservatives have talk radio and Fox News. Evens out. And moderates like me have to watch reruns of Night Court.

comment #20

Just Shoot it, Wedding Boy says ...

"Liberals have movies/documentaries/New York Times, conservatives have talk radio and Fox News. Evens out. And moderates like me have to watch reruns of Night Court."

Nice generalization. Un-fucking-believable.

comment #21

Anonymous says ...

Bin Laden does give a damn.

http://www.consortiumnews.com/2006/070306.html

comment #22

NYCBusybody says ...

"Nice generalization. Un-fucking-believable."

Christ, can anyone sense sarcasm anymore? I obviously meant that an over-generalized joke, to wit my sterling bon mot of a Night Court reference.

Lighten up, Osama.

comment #23

NYCBusybody says ...

Consortiumnews is a radically far-left website. Consulting that for an article about Osama Bin Laden would be the equivalent of reading Ann Coulter on Bill Clinton.

comment #24

Anonymous says ...

Please. You got called on an idiotic statement and then tried to play that statement off as sarcasm.

Nice try.

comment #25

NYCBusybody says ...

I must protest. I made an allusion to the amusing exploits of Bull and his nutty gang at Night Court for a reason.

comment #26

Anonymous says ...

Nope.

comment #27

NYCBusybody says ...

Not even if I point out that Night Court was known as having one of the tallest male casts in the history of television, with Richard Moll at 6' 7 1/2", John Larroquette and Harry Anderson at 6'4" and Charles Robinson at 6'2"?

comment #28

mike says ...

NYCBusybody is one of the most fascinating characters on here. I disagree with almost everything he ever says, he contradicts himself constantly, loves taking digs at "Blue staters" (despite being in one himself) and making some of the craziest, most obnoxious talkbacks I've ever read.

And then he puts in that thing about Night Court having one of the tallest casts in television history, and I have to mop up the floor after pissing myself laughing.

Well done, sir.

comment #29

guy steele says ...

Oh I just have to weigh in on this thread!

First off... Yes Bush as made mistakes. Yes I voted for him. But get one thing clear 9/11 is in no way GW's fault. How could it be? Can you come to this country find a home, enroll in a class learn to fly a airliner, plan the take down of at least 4 jets and pull it off in 8 months?
This was in the planning for years. Bush inherited the CIA, FBI ect. situation.
Has he done the right things since 9/11? Partly. We couldn't let these fanatical extremist get away with what they had done. We couldn't just lick our wounds, complain and turn the other cheek. No I do believe we had to take the war to them. Thing is where is them? They are not an Army. They are nomadic. They really don't have one Country but many that give them safe harbor and passage.
How can you fight an enemy who doesn't take you on on a battlefield and fight with honor?
You have to just do what we are doing... Thing is taking on Iraq was not the right choice at least not as our second choice. Syria and Iran have been way more trouble to us and the world and to some degree N. Korea but there are other ways to handle N.K.
But to fight the wrong-headed faction that hides behind Islam and innocents is to take it to them where ever they are before they do us and Western civilization in. And nows the time.
What I think frustrates everyone here is we usually have to do this by the rules, the UN and opinions of other Countries. But do our enemies use a rule book? No. And if we diviate from the rules ourselves in dealing with this type of enemy were are called into the Principal's office and made accountible. Who is holding those who wish us and are way of life destroyed responsible?
I think it's time in the Arab world that the good people there stand up as one voice and tell these terrorists they are wrong and they are not fighting in the name of Islam.
We are a society that should love all, serve all, welcome all.
You are Hindu, Buddist, Muslm, Christian, Jewish-whatever then great be that. Just allow others to be what ever works for them and vice-versa.
As for Israel... sweet J... share your land. Let the Palestine people have a place to call their own... hoist their flag and govern. They deserve it as much as you do. No one is better than anyone else. Some might be smarter, richer, whatever but not more deserving.
This World needs to learn a very big lesson that it seems incapable of: Repeating the same mistakes over and over. We never seem to learn from our collective past.
One more thing... has anyone noticed that the leaders of these Fanatical Terrorists never lead the attack, do not strap bombs to themselves? Drive bomb laden cars and blow themselves up to reach these Virgins and Gods warmth? I mean if it's so great to die killing innocents you don't like because of Religion and you get to go to God and have Virgins then my gosh I would think Osama and his ilk would be lining up to be first. But why would they when they can get young youthful believers to do it. SO maybe then... going to meet your maker isn't what it's all cranked up to be...
Well these are my off the top opinions on this matter.

comment #30

NYCBusybody says ...

Yes, the Iraq War was a ridiculous and misguided error by the Bush Administration. I actually went to a protest in 2003 against it, and would again.

If someone thinks that my having that idea in some way "contradicts" being able to also see the lunacy of the anti-Bush crowd, they have to be out of their minds. 9/11 was planned far before Bush, far before Rumsfeld. They're just idiots who stumbled into something much larger.

And thank you for the hat tip, mike, my good man. I like to be the Eddie Haskell, if you will, of wherever I lay my head. Pissing off lefties is even more fun than pissing off righties, which I do in abundance.

comment #31

Anonymous says ...

"Consortiumnews is a radically far-left website. Consulting that for an article about Osama Bin Laden would be the equivalent of reading Ann Coulter on Bill Clinton."

The type of response that only Bill "Mr. Fallafel" O'Reilly" would appreciate. Nice job!

comment #32

NYCBusybody says ...

"The type of response that only Bill "Mr. Fallafel" O'Reilly" would appreciate. Nice job!"

The fact that I obviously have intense dislike for far-righties like O'Reilly and his ilk means your statement is not only wrong, but pointless.

However, that's how those without ideas argue. Setting up straw men.

comment #33

NYCBusybody says ...

And, might I add, the idea that if I don't agree with everything Michael Moore or Cindy Sheehan says somehow makes me a "conservative" (please God, spare me the horror) or a Bush-supporter is EXACTLY the kind of "you're either with us or against us - if you don't agree with me completely, you're on the evil other side" thinking that Rove and Bush use so insidiously. That's my whole point. Moore and Sheehan are as dangerous and simplistic as any far-rightie.

comment #34

guy steele says ...

To Mr. NYCBusybody... as you can see from my post above you we agree about the 9/11 issue.
Making fun of the far left or far right is only fun because they both make it so easy... they lead with their collective chins.
If only the Libertarians could find someone this country couold get behind.
You cannot please everyone. Goverment can't be perfect nor take care of eveyone. There is no Utopia... there can't be... we are Human and our Nature forbids it.
Though I have always felt if we could marry what we The USA does right with what the Canadians do right we would have one rightious society.

comment #35

NYCBusybody says ...

I agree, guy, although I can't really get 100% behind the Libertarian party because their platform is a little too fiscally conservative for my taste. I'm staunchly pro-capitalism, but I don't think they provide the proper amount of safety net necessary to care for people who slip through cracks.

But I do agree, making fun of the leftist fundamentalists on here sure is a hoot 'cause they make it so easy.

comment #36

guy steele says ...

Mr. NYCBusybody... Did you read my statement above?

I guess I am leading with my chin asking you your opinion of what I wrote.

Though I do find HE a strange place for political discussions... oh and one more thing...

Michael Moore: Please stop calling your movies Docs... they are not Docs... They are a one-sided, your the important one opinions.
Some of what you might focus on is true... but you do so from only your point of view and while that could be I guess considered non-fiction it's not a doc. Not when you make yourself and your ideals the subject yet the subject is really not about you but Automakers, Guns, GW ect...
Whew...

comment #37

NYCBusybody says ...

I did read it, guy, and agreed with most of all of it. I wouldn't ever, ever, ever vote for George W. Bush, but we agree on 9/11.

comment #38

GUY steele says ...

Mr. NYCBusybody...

Cool... I wouldn't vote for him again if he could run again. That said I wouldn't vote for Kerry instead knowing what we know now.
I would vote for this ticket though: Guilliani and Rice ticket. Anything but Ms. Clinton... now that would be a disaster bigger than Bush has been... Funny thing is though I wonder with Bush's popularity in the toliet and things not going well why he hasn't tried to win us back by appealing the gas tax until at least the end of his run.

comment #39

NYCBusybody says ...

I don't know, dude. I'm definitely not a Republican, so no Condi for me. I didn't vote for Kerry either. I have to go with Libertarian until the left gets its act together.

Now I'm off to the Village.

comment #40

Anonymous says ...

Have fun sucking cock.

comment #41

NYCBusybody says ...

Oooh, is that homophobia I detect?

comment #42

T.H. Ung says ...

All I know is that when I saw the trailer and it said at the end "...A True Story" I thought it said "...A Love Story."

comment #43

Scott Mendelson says ...

"Funny thing is though I wonder with Bush's popularity in the toliet and things not going well why he hasn't tried to win us back by appealing the gas tax until at least the end of his run."

The reason he doesn't do such things is that he really doesn't realize how unpopular his policies are. He never reads newspapers and he apparently has a harsh 'kill the messenger' temper in regards to aides giving him bad news. He is often kept in the dark about bad news and doesn't want long, detailed reports of the goings-ons. He fully believes that the many opinion pulls are rigged or are made by the 'liberal media' to attack him. He really does live in a bubble. This is why, among other things, his first debate performace was so poor in the 2004 election. He wasn't used to having anyone ask real questions and openly criticize him in a public forum.

Scott Mendelson

comment #44

NYCBusybody says ...

I agree, Scott.

comment #45

NYCBusybody says ...

Although this brings up the idea of to what extent elected politicians should simply follow polls and do what the majority of the electorate say, or follow their own gut and instinct and beliefs.

I know that if, say, a Democrat were President and he was firmly supporting anti-death penalty measures, and not backing down even if it was very unpopular in the country, I'd still support him, because I believe strongly that it's the right thing to do. So the general idea that a President is wrong if he doesn't just listen to the people at all times, is, in my belief, inadequate.

comment #46

NYCBusybody says ...

Which is why a lot of people on both sides didn't like Bill Clinton, because he was seen as a please-all-sides, govern by the polls kind of guy.

Which I don't necessarily agree with. Clinton was always my kinda guy. Southern, McDonald's eating, girl-lovin' moderate left-winger.

Man I'm posting a lot.

comment #47

Anonymous says ...

The fact that I obviously have intense dislike for far-righties like O'Reilly and his ilk means your statement is not only wrong, but pointless.

Sorry, you come off as a dead ringer for O'Reilly. Laughably considering himself as a "moderate", labelling others as "far right", "far left". and feeling as though you've won an argument when you get the last word...

comment #48

NYCBusybody says ...

Wow, you really think so? So far I've stated that I'm firmly pro-choice, pro-gay marriage, anti-death penalty, not fiscally conservative enough to be a Libertarian, a militant agnostic that LIVES for the separation of church and state (O'Reilly's pet issue, saying there's a "War on Xmas", no?), and that I was always and still am a Bill Clinton fan.

Man, if that makes me Bill O'Reilly, I guess I agree with him more than I thought!

comment #49

NYCBusybody says ...

The fact that people in this country, and especially on this site, can't understand how someone can hate both George W. Bush AND Michael Moore is mind-boggling to me.

comment #50

Anonymous says ...

poor little mind-boggled bootlicker. Any A-hole that calls Cindy Sheehan 'far-left' compares Murtha's statements to bin Laden, & equates Native American perspectives with Southern Racism is no moderate. Your rhetoric is much closer to the moronic banter of Bill O'Reilly than your insulting (& outrageously stupid) second post above...which, if you haven't put it together, places you on the extreme right.

'The media is biased towards moderate left-wing political thought'

Your ability to place the media on the political continuum is like the rest of your thought; incompetant & skewed hard right. You don't pis anyone off, you're just wrong, there's a difference.

comment #51

NYCBusybody says ...

The anoynmous poster above is obviously extreme-right, and just pretending to be an O'Reilly hater to make O'Reilly haters look idiotic.

Cindy Sheehan is very far left. She once said "America is and has never been worth dying for". Michael Moore was AGAINST the war in Afghanistan...Afghanistan!

And what is a moderate anyway? I have several "conservative" views on issues, but mostly firmly liberal ones. I hate extremes on both sides. Unlike you, who are obviously a closet-Bushie, or maybe even Karl Rove posting in disguise.

comment #52

NYCBusybody says ...

And all I said was that Native Americans can be, and are, just as racist as any other population can be, including white southerners.

Or is it considered a PC Crime to possibly think that Native Americans could possibly have flaws at all?

comment #53

NYCBusybody says ...

(By the way, I'm black, and have found in my experiences that Native Americans have generally very hostile views towards African-Americans..they don't seem to dislike us as much as whites, but man...)

comment #54

Thompson says ...

Busybody throws around the terms racist and anti-semite a bit callously, and seems to incorrectly equate the rather benign term of liberal with the far, far left, but otherwise he's far from a troll. Comparing him to O'Reilly is a bit ridiculous.

comment #55

Anonymous says ...

he's far from a troll. Comparing him to O'Reilly is a bit ridiculous.

O really. His gross generalizations, whining about the dixie chicks, calling Sheehan far left, lumping Murtha & John Kerry in with Osama are exactly what O'Reilly would and has done.

It's simply asinine to defend this little toad. He claims to be moderate left but there really isn't a nickels worth of difference between his highly predjudicial outbursts & rants against farleft/liberal/moderates & the views of say, Hannity.

comment #56

MAGGA says ...

NYCBushieboner, please stop turning this into an AICN talkback! How can you know what´s far left when you don´t even know where the centre of the universe is, man...

comment #57

Studs Burka says ...

If the far right's growing enthusiasm for Stone's movie matches its deep love for "Cinderella Man," think of the impact it will have!

Here's what one conservative writer (John Podoretz) said of the latter: "Cinderella Man, starring Russell Crowe and directed by Ron Howard, is a thrilling piece of work. No, more than thrilling. I left the screening room this afternoon exhilarated, moved, excited, stirred and overwhelmed, convinced that Cinderella Man is one of the best movies ever made"

comment #58

Phil says ...

I wish Jeff left out this post about right leaning versus left leaning. Alas ...

comment #59

Phil says ...

Also, if you read the link, not surprising it is from the New York Times.

comment #60

Joe Greenia says ...

Hey Jeff, is there any way to incorporate a feature whereby we can de-select specific posters -you know, click a button and render their comments unseen? Other site do this, it might be useful here.

comment #61

Nicol D says ...

When a man says he demonstrated against the Iraq war, is for SSM, abortion , loved Clinton and despises Bush yet is still accused of being hard right...

...you know the left is off its rails.

comment #62

Phil says ...

Hey Joe, no big deal with the above posts by folks. With a blurb by Jeff on this subject, we all knew (including you) that we'd get the blood heated on a lot of folks. No big deal.

comment #63

Sean Richardson says ...

"So the general idea that a President is wrong if he doesn't just listen to the people at all times, is, in my belief, inadequate."

I think the reason people are so quick to label you conservative is the way you twist everything to make the people seem ridiculous for being anti-Bush.

For instance, to take the criticism that Bush never ever reads anything and refuses to hear news that doesn't conform to what he already believes, shooting the messenger and whatnot ... to bend that to "he has to listen to all people at all times" is setting up a straw-man argument that nobody made. Nobody wants a president that only governs by polls or other people's opinions ... but a president absolutely *should* be aware of them.

In the example you gave, if the anti-death penalty president were unable to acknowledge the fact that his policy was controversial, and that it might not work, and all that, I'd be against him. (I'd personally disagree with him either way, but I'd *love* to see the experiment attempted.)

comment #64

Anonymous says ...

When one nutzi comes to the aid of another nutzi, you know they can at least spot their own kind.

Congrats boys

comment #65

Phil says ...

politics, who wants to talk politics?