Hello There, Guest! (LoginRegister)

Post Reply 
Violent threats against the president are OK now?
Author Message
stinkfist Offline
StL Cards & USM
*

Posts: 26,779
Joined: Nov 2011
Reputation: 707
I Root For: USM hosting
Location: who knows?
Post: #11
RE: Violent threats against the president are OK now?
(03-20-2017 09:15 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  
(03-16-2017 05:03 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  
(03-16-2017 01:14 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  
(03-16-2017 01:13 PM)Bull_Is_Back Wrote:  now?... Checks to see the political party of the office holder, sees 'R', yup were good..
I mean they made a movie about killing Bush https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Death_of_a...2006_film)
Death of a President is a 2006 British docudrama political thriller film about the fictional assassination of George W. Bush, the 43rd U.S. President, on 19 October 2007 in Chicago, Illinois.
==
The left is inherently more politically violent than the right, or at least that has been the case for hte past 50 years.
C'mon Bull. You're better than this. Google Obama noose. Geez.

How many movies have they made about killing Obama?

When they make as many as they made about killing Bush, then you'll have something to let us all know about.

For the umpteenth time, the movie was not about killing Bush. It was about what would happen in the aftermath of the death of an american president. They don't show anyone even looking like Bush getting killed. The movie was made in 2006 as a pseudo documentary of a recent event, so yes, Bush was the president at that time.

Have you even seen it? It's a giant nothingburger.

since I now live in hattiesburger (deemed by our illustrious dippo controlled city council), and have never had sympathy for those that 'choose wrongly' in scope...if a "nothingburger", then why have a position relative to Owl's response?

disclaimer: we all know "why"

dude....you're not shockingly lost is spacial terms.....
(This post was last modified: 03-20-2017 09:25 AM by stinkfist.)
03-20-2017 09:24 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Owl 69/70/75 Offline
Just an old rugby coach
*

Posts: 49,365
Joined: Sep 2005
Reputation: 787
I Root For: RiceBathChelsea
Location: Montgomery, TX

DonatorsNew Orleans Bowl
Post: #12
RE: Violent threats against the president are OK now?
(03-20-2017 09:15 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  
(03-16-2017 05:03 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  
(03-16-2017 01:14 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  
(03-16-2017 01:13 PM)Bull_Is_Back Wrote:  now?... Checks to see the political party of the office holder, sees 'R', yup were good..
I mean they made a movie about killing Bush https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Death_of_a...2006_film)
Death of a President is a 2006 British docudrama political thriller film about the fictional assassination of George W. Bush, the 43rd U.S. President, on 19 October 2007 in Chicago, Illinois.
==
The left is inherently more politically violent than the right, or at least that has been the case for hte past 50 years.
C'mon Bull. You're better than this. Google Obama noose. Geez.
How many movies have they made about killing Obama?
When they make as many as they made about killing Bush, then you'll have something to let us all know about.
For the umpteenth time, the movie was not about killing Bush. It was about what would happen in the aftermath of the death of an american president. They don't show anyone even looking like Bush getting killed. The movie was made in 2006 as a pseudo documentary of a recent event, so yes, Bush was the president at that time.
Have you even seen it? It's a giant nothingburger.

How does it compare to the movie about killing Obama?

Don't go playing naive here, Tom. We all know what the intent here was. And there were leftists critics who panned it for not making it more clear that the subject was killing specifically Bush.
03-20-2017 11:10 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
nomad2u2001 Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 15,972
Joined: Nov 2006
Reputation: 336
I Root For: ECU
Location: NC
Post: #13
RE: Violent threats against the president are OK now?
Everything is cool now. The entire reason the guy was voted in was to tear down the decorum of the establishment. Maybe threats fall into that PC thing you guys hated. I don't know.
(This post was last modified: 03-20-2017 11:13 AM by nomad2u2001.)
03-20-2017 11:12 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Redwingtom Offline
Free Johnny
*

Posts: 26,449
Joined: Dec 2003
Reputation: 439
I Root For: B-G-S-U !!!!
Location: Ann Arbor, MI
Post: #14
RE: Violent threats against the president are OK now?
(03-20-2017 11:10 AM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  
(03-20-2017 09:15 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  
(03-16-2017 05:03 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  
(03-16-2017 01:14 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  
(03-16-2017 01:13 PM)Bull_Is_Back Wrote:  now?... Checks to see the political party of the office holder, sees 'R', yup were good..
I mean they made a movie about killing Bush https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Death_of_a...2006_film)
Death of a President is a 2006 British docudrama political thriller film about the fictional assassination of George W. Bush, the 43rd U.S. President, on 19 October 2007 in Chicago, Illinois.
==
The left is inherently more politically violent than the right, or at least that has been the case for hte past 50 years.
C'mon Bull. You're better than this. Google Obama noose. Geez.
How many movies have they made about killing Obama?
When they make as many as they made about killing Bush, then you'll have something to let us all know about.
For the umpteenth time, the movie was not about killing Bush. It was about what would happen in the aftermath of the death of an american president. They don't show anyone even looking like Bush getting killed. The movie was made in 2006 as a pseudo documentary of a recent event, so yes, Bush was the president at that time.
Have you even seen it? It's a giant nothingburger.

How does it compare to the movie about killing Obama?

Don't go playing naive here, Tom. We all know what the intent here was. And there were leftists critics who panned it for not making it more clear that the subject was killing specifically Bush.

Name one critic who did that please. And a link would be nice too.

And once again, the movie was not about killing Bush. And the intent was to portray how America would react to a modern day death of their president. You'd know this if you would have actually watched it. And BTW - Next to nobody saw it because it was a low-budget British nothingburger.
(This post was last modified: 03-20-2017 11:18 AM by Redwingtom.)
03-20-2017 11:17 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Redwingtom Offline
Free Johnny
*

Posts: 26,449
Joined: Dec 2003
Reputation: 439
I Root For: B-G-S-U !!!!
Location: Ann Arbor, MI
Post: #15
RE: Violent threats against the president are OK now?
And one more thing. I bet way more people saw this than that crappy film. Sorry.

[Image: 19845399_SA.jpg]
(This post was last modified: 03-20-2017 11:19 AM by Redwingtom.)
03-20-2017 11:19 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Bull_Is_Back Online
All American
*

Posts: 3,410
Joined: Oct 2016
Reputation: 257
I Root For: Buffalo
Location:
Post: #16
RE: Violent threats against the president are OK now?
(03-20-2017 11:19 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  And one more thing. I bet way more people saw this than that crappy film. Sorry.

[Image: 19845399_SA.jpg]

The film won a total of 6 awards including; the International Critics Prize (FIPRESCI) from the 2006 Toronto Film Festival,[24] the International Emmy Award for the TV Movie/Mini-Series category in the (UK), the RTS Television Award in the Digital Channel Programme category from the Royal Television Society, the RTBF TV Prize for Best Picture Award from the Brussels European Film Festival for director Gabriel Range, the Banff Rockie Award from the Banff Television Festival for the film, and one for director Gabriel Range. The film also received a nomination for Best Visual Effects from the British Academy TV Awards in 2007.

Yea... I'm sure more people saw some awful road sign in bumbleburg than an award winning film...
03-20-2017 11:24 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Redwingtom Offline
Free Johnny
*

Posts: 26,449
Joined: Dec 2003
Reputation: 439
I Root For: B-G-S-U !!!!
Location: Ann Arbor, MI
Post: #17
RE: Violent threats against the president are OK now?
(03-20-2017 11:24 AM)Bull_Is_Back Wrote:  
(03-20-2017 11:19 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  And one more thing. I bet way more people saw this than that crappy film. Sorry.

[Image: 19845399_SA.jpg]

The film won a total of 6 awards including; the International Critics Prize (FIPRESCI) from the 2006 Toronto Film Festival,[24] the International Emmy Award for the TV Movie/Mini-Series category in the (UK), the RTS Television Award in the Digital Channel Programme category from the Royal Television Society, the RTBF TV Prize for Best Picture Award from the Brussels European Film Festival for director Gabriel Range, the Banff Rockie Award from the Banff Television Festival for the film, and one for director Gabriel Range. The film also received a nomination for Best Visual Effects from the British Academy TV Awards in 2007.

Yea... I'm sure more people saw some awful road sign in bumbleburg than an award winning film...

The film had a total box office of $870k. Nobody saw it. At $10 a ticket, that's 87,000 people.

And no, I wasn't implying they saw that sign in person. I first saw it on cable news. So yes, more than 87,000 people would have seen that.
(This post was last modified: 03-20-2017 11:38 AM by Redwingtom.)
03-20-2017 11:36 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
nomad2u2001 Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 15,972
Joined: Nov 2006
Reputation: 336
I Root For: ECU
Location: NC
Post: #18
RE: Violent threats against the president are OK now?
(03-20-2017 11:24 AM)Bull_Is_Back Wrote:  
(03-20-2017 11:19 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  And one more thing. I bet way more people saw this than that crappy film. Sorry.

[Image: 19845399_SA.jpg]

The film won a total of 6 awards including; the International Critics Prize (FIPRESCI) from the 2006 Toronto Film Festival,[24] the International Emmy Award for the TV Movie/Mini-Series category in the (UK), the RTS Television Award in the Digital Channel Programme category from the Royal Television Society, the RTBF TV Prize for Best Picture Award from the Brussels European Film Festival for director Gabriel Range, the Banff Rockie Award from the Banff Television Festival for the film, and one for director Gabriel Range. The film also received a nomination for Best Visual Effects from the British Academy TV Awards in 2007.

Yea... I'm sure more people saw some awful road sign in bumbleburg than an award winning film...

Award winning doesn't mean widely watched.
03-20-2017 11:38 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Owl 69/70/75 Offline
Just an old rugby coach
*

Posts: 49,365
Joined: Sep 2005
Reputation: 787
I Root For: RiceBathChelsea
Location: Montgomery, TX

DonatorsNew Orleans Bowl
Post: #19
RE: Violent threats against the president are OK now?
(03-20-2017 11:17 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  
(03-20-2017 11:10 AM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  
(03-20-2017 09:15 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  
(03-16-2017 05:03 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  
(03-16-2017 01:14 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  C'mon Bull. You're better than this. Google Obama noose. Geez.
How many movies have they made about killing Obama?
When they make as many as they made about killing Bush, then you'll have something to let us all know about.
For the umpteenth time, the movie was not about killing Bush. It was about what would happen in the aftermath of the death of an american president. They don't show anyone even looking like Bush getting killed. The movie was made in 2006 as a pseudo documentary of a recent event, so yes, Bush was the president at that time.
Have you even seen it? It's a giant nothingburger.

How does it compare to the movie about killing Obama?

Don't go playing naive here, Tom. We all know what the intent here was. And there were leftists critics who panned it for not making it more clear that the subject was killing specifically Bush.
Name one critic who did that please. And a link would be nice too.
And once again, the movie was not about killing Bush. And the intent was to portray how America would react to a modern day death of their president. You'd know this if you would have actually watched it. And BTW - Next to nobody saw it because it was a low-budget British nothingburger.

I'm not going to spend my time looking for film reviews from 10 years ago, particularly when a quick search reveals that most of them have been pulled off the net. But I remember a bunch of them, and here's one that captures the spirit.

"Given the controversy, which strongly suggested that the filmmakers had it in for President Bush, the film's biggest shocker may be how kind Range and coscreenwriter Simon Finch are to him."

http://www.tvguide.com/movies/death-of-a...ew/283662/

The movie showed Bush speaking as president, then came the killing. If it wasn't pretty clearly pointed at Bush, there was no need to show footage that clearly identified him as the president. You can play the naive card all you want, but the purpose was pretty clear.

If it had been Obama, you'd have been screaming bloody murder, and we both know that.
(This post was last modified: 03-20-2017 11:44 AM by Owl 69/70/75.)
03-20-2017 11:43 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Redwingtom Offline
Free Johnny
*

Posts: 26,449
Joined: Dec 2003
Reputation: 439
I Root For: B-G-S-U !!!!
Location: Ann Arbor, MI
Post: #20
RE: Violent threats against the president are OK now?
(03-20-2017 11:43 AM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  
(03-20-2017 11:17 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  
(03-20-2017 11:10 AM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  
(03-20-2017 09:15 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  
(03-16-2017 05:03 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  How many movies have they made about killing Obama?
When they make as many as they made about killing Bush, then you'll have something to let us all know about.
For the umpteenth time, the movie was not about killing Bush. It was about what would happen in the aftermath of the death of an american president. They don't show anyone even looking like Bush getting killed. The movie was made in 2006 as a pseudo documentary of a recent event, so yes, Bush was the president at that time.
Have you even seen it? It's a giant nothingburger.

How does it compare to the movie about killing Obama?

Don't go playing naive here, Tom. We all know what the intent here was. And there were leftists critics who panned it for not making it more clear that the subject was killing specifically Bush.
Name one critic who did that please. And a link would be nice too.
And once again, the movie was not about killing Bush. And the intent was to portray how America would react to a modern day death of their president. You'd know this if you would have actually watched it. And BTW - Next to nobody saw it because it was a low-budget British nothingburger.

I'm not going to spend my time looking for film reviews from 10 years ago, particularly when a quick search reveals that most of them have been pulled off the net. But I remember a bunch of them, and here's one that captures the spirit.

"Given the controversy, which strongly suggested that the filmmakers had it in for President Bush, the film's biggest shocker may be how kind Range and coscreenwriter Simon Finch are to him."

http://www.tvguide.com/movies/death-of-a...ew/283662/

The movie showed Bush speaking as president, then came the killing. If it wasn't pretty clearly pointed at Bush, there was no need to show footage that clearly identified him as the president. You can play the naive card all you want, but the purpose was pretty clear.

If it had been Obama, you'd have been screaming bloody murder, and we both know that.

Pfft...just like your claim of all the articles about the supposedly horribly biased Debo Adegbile, which you never produced, you failed again.

No, that review does not pan the movie for not making it more clear as you intimated. He says that the film does not fit the controversy. Which is EXACTLY what you've been trying...and continually failing...to do.

He says exactly what I've been telling you for 2 years!
Quote:His film is less about the fatal shooting of a president than about what happens next, and Range's real concern is post-9/11 fearmongering and its corrosive effect on democratic ideals.

And of course they would show Bush because the movie is a 2006 faux documentary of how an assassination would effect a post 9/11 world!
(This post was last modified: 03-20-2017 11:58 AM by Redwingtom.)
03-20-2017 11:57 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply 




User(s) browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)


Copyright © 2002-2017 Collegiate Sports Nation Bulletin Board System (CSNbbs), All Rights Reserved.
CSNbbs is an independent fan site and is in no way affiliated to the NCAA or any of the schools and conferences it represents.
This site monetizes links. FTC Disclosure.
Powered By MyBB, © 2002-2017 MyBB Group.