Jump to content

Chappaquidick

TahoeHorn

By TahoeHorn
in Cloak Room

 Share

Recommended Posts

Neonmoon

Neonmoon 38127

Posted
Posted
On 4/6/2018 at 9:31 PM, Bateshorn said:

Again, these were all awful situations, people died. Why are we discussing them now?  If Laura Bush had done 6 months at a half way house and never gone to college, do you think she would have met W at the low point in his life?

PhD asked why I don’t give a fuck now?  Because it’s the past, and it no longer affects the future, and it looks like there may be more than a partisan tint to dragging up now.  The film is already getting mixed and partisan reviews. 

Ask yourself: if Jenna Bush ran for Congress and a movie about Laura  Bush’s Accident suddenly appeared, would you question the motive?  Shocker that a Kennedy is getting some national talk and here we go with Chappaquidick.  

1. Why are we discussing them now?

A politician caused the death of another human being through vehicular manslauhter, and didn’t serve any time. He was from a very powerful family that had a President in the family. He continued to have a “championed” career as a politician. No movie has ever been made about it. But according to you, movies with political subject matter can only be made within a certain set number of years after the incident?  I’m sorry, but that makes zero sense. So no more movies about Watergate? No more about Florida re-count? I could go on and on

2. If Laura Bush had done 6 months at a half way house and never gone to college, do you think she would have met W at the low point in his life?

I really don’t think you can distinguish between a politicians actions and the actions of their spouse. So I don’t believe Kennedys vehicular manslaughter is analogous to Laura Bush, so I don’t really understand why you keep bringing it up. The public and media usually gives a politicians spouse and offspring a pass. At the same time, I would argue she’s a public figure and I’d be okay with whatever movie someone wanted to make about her life or the consequences of her vehicle manslaughter. 

3. Because it’s the past now, and it no longer affects the future, and it looks like there may be more than a partisan tint to dragging up now? I

This makes absolutely zero sense. So if a subject is in the past, you can’t make a movie about it? Are you actually serious? Again, 1000 years from now, someone will make a movie about the Holocaust, WW2, Slavery, Jesus Christ, and you would argue that it’s in the past and no longer affects the future so why even talk about it? That’s insane. And of course there is a partisan tint to the movie. Do you think all the movies about George Bush are non partisan documentaries? 

4. It’s already getting mixed and partisan review. 

You are telling me that a movie is getting both positive and negative reviews? I can’t even 

5. Ask yourself: if Jenna Bush ran for Congress and a movie about Laura  Bush’s Accident suddenly appeared, would you question the motive?  Shocker that a Kennedy is getting some national talk and here we go with Chappaquidick.  

Again, Kennedy and Laura bush are not analogous political figures. But I would be okay with whatever movie was made because it’s a free country. I wouldn’t question the motive because I would know the motive. Just like I know the motives behind the anti-Bush movies, how he stole the election, how he caused wars, etc. They are meant to frame and control the narrative of the past. It may be accurate, it may not be. You just seems to be upset a movie is being made that doesn’t support your team. I could be wrong. I’m guessing when Ivanna Trump runs for senate, and someone releases a movie about Donald doing something less sever than manslaughter, you’re going to reappear with the same outrage? 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Sawbonz

Sawbonz 27398

Posted
Posted (edited)

Here’s what the distributor and makers have to say. Source doesn’t seem like a Russian outlet but draw your own conclusions 

http://www.indiewire.com/2018/04/chappaquiddick-movie-ted-kennedy-jason-clarke-byron-allen-right-wing-press-1201949529/amp/

 

Quote

Byron Allen’s Entertainment Studios acquired the film before Toronto for $4 million against $16 million in P&A. When he asked Black List 2015 screenwriters Taylor Allen and Andrew Logan why Kopechne didn’t sleep with Kennedy in the movie, they said they’d based their script on the inquest.

 

“That’s the answer I was looking for,” said Allen, who was an ardent Hillary Clinton supporter in the 2016 election. “‘You aren’t the right, or the left. You are straight across the plate

 

Edited by Sawbonz
Link to comment
Share on other sites
FondrenRoad

FondrenRoad 4378

Posted
Posted
2 hours ago, Neonmoon said:

1. Why are we discussing them now?

A politician caused the death of another human being through vehicular manslauhter, and didn’t serve any time. He was from a very powerful family that had a President in the family. He continued to have a “championed” career as a politician. No movie has ever been made about it. But according to you, movies with political subject matter can only be made within a certain set number of years after the incident?  I’m sorry, but that makes zero sense. So no more movies about Watergate? No more about Florida re-count? I could go on and on

2. If Laura Bush had done 6 months at a half way house and never gone to college, do you think she would have met W at the low point in his life?

I really don’t think you can distinguish between a politicians actions and the actions of their spouse. So I don’t believe Kennedys vehicular manslaughter is analogous to Laura Bush, so I don’t really understand why you keep bringing it up. The public and media usually gives a politicians spouse and offspring a pass. At the same time, I would argue she’s a public figure and I’d be okay with whatever movie someone wanted to make about her life or the consequences of her vehicle manslaughter. 

3. Because it’s the past now, and it no longer affects the future, and it looks like there may be more than a partisan tint to dragging up now? I

This makes absolutely zero sense. So if a subject is in the past, you can’t make a movie about it? Are you actually serious? Again, 1000 years from now, someone will make a movie about the Holocaust, WW2, Slavery, Jesus Christ, and you would argue that it’s in the past and no longer affects the future so why even talk about it? That’s insane. And of course there is a partisan tint to the movie. Do you think all the movies about George Bush are non partisan documentaries? 

4. It’s already getting mixed and partisan review. 

You are telling me that a movie is getting both positive and negative reviews? I can’t even 

5. Ask yourself: if Jenna Bush ran for Congress and a movie about Laura  Bush’s Accident suddenly appeared, would you question the motive?  Shocker that a Kennedy is getting some national talk and here we go with Chappaquidick.  

Again, Kennedy and Laura bush are not analogous political figures. But I would be okay with whatever movie was made because it’s a free country. I wouldn’t question the motive because I would know the motive. Just like I know the motives behind the anti-Bush movies, how he stole the election, how he caused wars, etc. They are meant to frame and control the narrative of the past. It may be accurate, it may not be. You just seems to be upset a movie is being made that doesn’t support your team. I could be wrong. I’m guessing when Ivanna Trump runs for senate, and someone releases a movie about Donald doing something less sever than manslaughter, you’re going to reappear with the same outrage? 

 

Yes, I would question the motive if Jenna ran and negative movies about her mom and dad appeared. She is her own person.  Also, Chelsea and Hillary were constantly attacked by the public when Bill was Pres.  Laura, the Bush girls, and the Obama girls were largely left alone. Michelle was under attack constantly however. 

Why does the current Kennedy have to be held responsible for the mistakes of past Kennedys?  Even the Trump kids are getting blamed for their own bullshit rather than their father's.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Judge Roybeanbag

Judge Roybeanbag 11807

Posted
Posted
On 4/6/2018 at 9:22 PM, Neonmoon said:

You don’t think there is a difference between Laura Bush and George Bush? Seriously? 

I’m not saying what she did wasn’t wrong or didnt deserve charges. But do you not see the difference between a politician and a politicians wife?

So mad.   So relevant. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
NameAlreadyInUse

NameAlreadyInUse 5106

Posted
Posted
6 hours ago, Judge Roybeanbag said:

Go back to shaggy or Tyler you pointy headed faggot.

Dude, seriously, fuck off with that faggot shit. I'm sick and fucking tired of watching you nimrods call each other names, but not even having the energy to be creative about it.  If all you can come up with in your name calling is to call someone gay in a nasty way, you need to work on your fucking insult game and shut the fuck up until you are better at it.  Its lame, its stupid, and its already old and played out for most by the time they get to high school.  Do better motherfucker.

  • Like 5
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
83Horn

83Horn 1638

Posted
Posted
On 4/6/2018 at 10:05 PM, Bateshorn said:

Where’s the movie about Laura Bush blowing through a stop sign at full speed, killing her ex boyfriend, and walking away without even a traffic citation?  Oh, that’s not a big event, not newsworthy?  The woman who essentially got the future 43rd president of the United States sober and didn’t even have a basic inquest after admittedly violating the law and killing another human being? A covered over crime that changed the course of history?

 

Let this go boys, it’s old history. Rich, powerful white people can literally get away with murder.  And they have, many times. 

You seriously think this is analogous?  Chappaquiddick happened just over a year after Bobby Kennedy was killed, and Teddy was widely viewed as the logical successor to the Kennedy mantle and the leadership role in the Democrat party that came with the Kennedy name, and as a future president. It really is not possible to overstate the monopoly the Kennedys had on the Democrat party, or the hold they had on political life in this country at this time.  This event was huge in its implications for America's political future.  On the other hand, Laura Bush was an unknown 17 year old high school senior at the time of her accident.  Neither she nor her family were involved in politics, she didn't know George Bush at the time, and probably hadn't even heard of his father yet.  Also, she didn't cravenly leave survivors to die at the scene while her family plotted a cover-up.  There is nothing analogous in these situations.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Judge Roybeanbag

Judge Roybeanbag 11807

Posted
Posted
46 minutes ago, NameAlreadyInUse said:

Dude, seriously, fuck off with that faggot shit. I'm sick and fucking tired of watching you nimrods call each other names, but not even having the energy to be creative about it.  If all you can come up with in your name calling is to call someone gay in a nasty way, you need to work on your fucking insult game and shut the fuck up until you are better at it.  Its lame, its stupid, and its already old and played out for most by the time they get to high school.  Do better motherfucker.

Point taken, mea culpa.   And good on you for pointing it out.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Onboard 2.0

Onboard 2.0 9083

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, NameAlreadyInUse said:

Dude, seriously, fuck off with that faggot shit. I'm sick and fucking tired of watching you nimrods call each other names, but not even having the energy to be creative about it.  If all you can come up with in your name calling is to call someone gay in a nasty way, you need to work on your fucking insult game and shut the fuck up until you are better at it.  Its lame, its stupid, and its already old and played out for most by the time they get to high school.  Do better motherfucker.

This guy gets it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Anastasis

Anastasis 23393

Posted
Posted (edited)
3 hours ago, NameAlreadyInUse said:

Dude, seriously, fuck off with that faggot shit. I'm sick and fucking tired of watching you nimrods call each other names, but not even having the energy to be creative about it.  If all you can come up with in your name calling is to call someone gay in a nasty way, you need to work on your fucking insult game and shut the fuck up until you are better at it.  Its lame, its stupid, and its already old and played out for most by the time they get to high school.  Do better motherfucker.

There's a good amount of latent homophobia built into most of judges unhinged rants.  Faggot this, cocksucker that, cheeto nut gargling, etc. He also seems to have some issue with licensed medical professionals in particular.  My hunch, he's working through some long-term personal medical problems and lashing out at his caricatures is part of his coping mechanism. Which is fine, and I hope that he finds whatever peace he needs. But he could dial it down a bit, and he would probably find that the people is he lashing out at aren't the animals he wishes they were. 

Edited by Anastasis
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Onboard 2.0

Onboard 2.0 9083

Posted
Posted (edited)
25 minutes ago, Brian Fantana said:

You support a president with a VP that thinks all gay people should be sent to re-education camps btw.

Just saying.

No I don't support him in every thing he believes, I just love that he beat Hillary Clinton. The text book definition of a  corrupt POS.

 

 But hey, thanks for grasping at straws.

Edited by Onboard 2.0
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Bateshorn

Bateshorn 9898

Posted
Posted (edited)

Look, you guys want to spend your money going to see a movie about a tragedy that iwas one of the most important scandals 1970, be my guest. 48 years ago. 

A car accident that involved two people. One of whom died in a horrific way.  The other who was subsequently duly and legally re-elected to the United States Senate 7 times. Then also died. 

A scandal that may have affected US history. Or may not. Because who fucking knows?   But I always find it interesting that 10 seconds after a Kennedy gets 15 minutes of airplay, suddenly, we, as a nation, need to have a serious discussion of Chappaquidick.

But, by all means, let’s dig up 50 year old political scandals where literally everyone jnvolved is now dead then make suppositions about how it changed world history. 

Edited by Bateshorn
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Bateshorn

Bateshorn 9898

Posted
Posted

I find Chappquidick to be a terrible tragedy.  And it’s emblamatic of the way wealth, power, and race interact with our justice system. 

If you want to use it as a story to contrast the way the poor and minirities mix with justice in this country, then that’s a story I’d like to hear. 

But the details are actually very, very well established.  Ted Kennedy was a drunken coward who hid behind political connections and lawyers to avoid prosecution. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Brian Fantana

Brian Fantana 6667

Posted
Posted
1 minute ago, Bateshorn said:

I find Chappquidick to be a terrible tragedy.  And it’s emblamatic of the way wealth, power, and race interact with our justice system. 

If you want to use it as a story to contrast the way the poor and minirities mix with justice in this country, then that’s a story I’d like to hear. 

But the details are actually very, very well established.  Ted Kennedy was a drunken coward who hid behind political connections and lawyers to avoid prosecution. 

If it's framed that way it might be ok. It's just the kind of thing that screams "boring" to me immediately. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
David Dennison

David Dennison 18652

Posted
Posted
2 hours ago, Onboard 2.0 said:

No I don't support him in every thing he believes, I just love that he beat Hillary Clinton. The text book definition of a  corrupt POS.

Just like Donald Trump and those around him. The only difference is they're your corrupt pieces of shit.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Onboard 2.0

Onboard 2.0 9083

Posted
Posted
8 hours ago, David Dennison said:

Just like Donald Trump and those around him. The only difference is they're your corrupt pieces of shit.

The difference is I don't think Trump is anything more than he is.  Hillary voters, believed that thoroughly corrupt POS Hillary was a good choice for president.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Bozo_Casanova

Bozo_Casanova 26277

Posted
Posted
The difference is I don't think Trump is anything more than he is.  Hillary voters, believed that thoroughly corrupt POS Hillary was a good choice for president.

That’s false and utterly ridiculous. There was almost no Democratic enthusiasm for Clinton. She couldn’t even run away from a 74 year old Yankee who isn’t even a Democrat. Most people who voted for Clinton voted for her for the same reason many Republicans voted for Trump: they thought she was the lesser of two evils. The difference is that the Clinton voters who thought that were right.

 

You, on the other hand, (on the basis of “corruption,” no less) voted for a man who is abandoning our role as the global standard bearer of Democracy and the international rules-based order that has guaranteed American hegemony for 75 years, not mention running an administration less respectful of basic ethical standards than any in living memory.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Onboard 2.0

Onboard 2.0 9083

Posted
Posted
4 minutes ago, Bozo_Casanova said:


That’s false and utterly ridiculous. There was almost no Democratic enthusiasm for Clinton. She didn’t even run away from a 74 year old Yankee who isn’t even a Democrat.
Most people who voted for Clinton voted for her for the same reason many Republicans voted for Trump: they thought she was the lesser of two evils. The difference is that the Clinton voters who thought that were right.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

We're hijacking a thread about another famous democrat POS shit T. Kennedy.  However, you can spin it any way you like. The democrat party wholeheartedly supported her to the point that they tuned over control of the entire democrat party apparatus (FACT). So you can try and explain away her nomination by a party willing to do anything to win, even seeing its soul to the devil, but you can't do as anything but whine about the truth.

Now Hillary was certainly qualified from a resume stand point, but she is a complete and utter corrupt criminal who did anything she could to win regardless of legality... HER ENTIRE CAREER.  Trump ain't much better, but he is, better than that hump of an excuse for a human.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Anastasis

Anastasis 23393

Posted
Posted (edited)

Very impressed with the deployment of But Trump and But Hillary combos in a thread about a Kennedy.

Well done gentlemen. 

37 minutes ago, Bozo_Casanova said:

... our role as the global standard bearer of Democracy....

You should have just left it at "order that has guaranteed American hegemony", because we don't give a shit about democracy unless it aligns in a particular case to our hegemonic interests.     

Edited by Anastasis
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Onboard 2.0

Onboard 2.0 9083

Posted
Posted
5 minutes ago, Anastasis said:

Very impressed with the deployment of But Trump and But Hillary combos in a thread about a Kennedy.

Well done gentlemen. 

You should have just left it at "order that has guaranteed American hegemony", because we don't give a shit about democracy unless it aligns in a particular case to our hegemonic interests.     

Yep, I agree, thread drift, lets get it back on track.  Theodore Kennedy was the biggest POS in the Senate for decades until a certain other Senator was elected from NY.  There's only one party that welcomes actual murderers and sexual assaulters to its ranks (and allegedly ex KKK grand poobahs).

How he was able to come out of that unscathed and electable has always bottled my mind.  4 brothers, 3 of which, despite their human flaws were actually honorable men I believe,  and one was a really really really big POS, who killed president Nixons plans for national healthcare in the 70's because he said, "no republican is going to be responsible for and get credit for a national healthcare plan."

 

Gonna see it this week.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Bozo_Casanova

Bozo_Casanova 26277

Posted
Posted
Very impressed with the deployment of But Trump and But Hillary combos in a thread about a Kennedy.
Well done gentlemen. 
You should have just left it at "order that has guaranteed American hegemony", because we don't give a shit about democracy unless it aligns in a particular case to our hegemonic interests.     

I chose my words carefully, note that I said “standard bearer” and not something more active.

Nevertheless, the idea of what the United States represents, even so imperfectly, is important as a source of inspiration globally.

That was my big takeaway last year in Italy: they were sad, because they felt the United States had become more like them.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Link to comment
Share on other sites
 Share
Go to topic listing


Football ... Basketball ... Baseball ... Other Sports ... Futbol ... 🤫995🤫 ... Gambling ... Movies & TV ... Music ... Hobbies ... Lulz ... Food & Travel ... Daily Texan ... Business and Markets ... Cloak Room ... Help ... For Sale ... Board Discussion ... Subscribe!... Donate!... Advertise... COOKIE MONSTER!

×
×
  • Create New...