slensam
-
Posts
355 -
Joined
Content Type
Blogs
Gallery
Downloads
Discussion
Posts posted by slensam
-
-
1 hour ago, GHScorpiosRule said:
So CNN finally put up The AIDS Crisis and Video Killed the Tadio Star episodes on Demand and I watched them.
First, the AIDS episode should have been two hours , or rather 90 minutes instead of 45. A lot of skimming over and apparently, Rock Hudson was the only celebrity to die from this. No mention of anyone else. I know Susan St. James is still among us, and Doris Day. Nothing from them about this?
interesting to see Geraldo's thoughts on how the government refused to do anything.
Wow-I hadn't remembered an effigy of Reagan being set on fire. He couldn't have made it more clear he was on the side of the homophobes.
I'm a cynic about most things, but still I was shocked and angered at the ignorant woman screaming at Ryan White how she wouldn't let him "kill" her child, when he was forced to leave the school.
As for the Video...no words. None. No mention of Rick Springfield, Culture Club (other than a clip of a song and a couple of sound bytes), bananarama??? Tears for Fears? Except at the end playing their song? And wait until the last minute until they mention BonfuckingJovi??!! What about the American artist who got together to release "we are the World?"
So lazy and looked like a last minute slap dash.
i"ll have more later when I get home.
To say I'm disappointed in CNN and Tom Hanks, is putting it mildly.
No Guns N' Roses either. They were kind of big at the end of the 80's.
-
1
-
-
3 hours ago, EllenCam said:
PLEASE stop that commercial for Vanishing Woman. "What happened to our
gurrrrrrlllls? Who is taking our gurrrrrllls?
Yeah, I keep seeing that commercial and what I always think is what the hell kind of accent or dialect is that?
-
2
-
-
I was looking forward to the Video episode of the Eighties, now I have no idea when its going to show up. They still haven't shown a few other topics for one reason or another. Trump, debates, planes,etc.
-
Politics junkies; it's all a game to them. They won't be affected by this stuff. Big exciting reality show.
-
6
-
-
Brock founded Media Matters for America. He's done some good work in my opinion.
-
2
-
-
54 minutes ago, Cobalt Stargazer said:
Man, I am so embarrassed for Jon right now.
I didn't even know that was him. Sheeeit, the "Slippery When Wet" days are looong gone!
-
3
-
-
They're ending with AIDS? That's depressing. I would have thought they would end with music or technology.
-
Well, don't I feel like an idiot! CNN aired Nixon v. Kennedy FIRST! It was a two hour recording and Clinton v. Bush aired during the second hour!
I can't really express why I had a huge smile on my face during the whole hour. Probably because it took me back during the campaign, and I remember how exciting it was...and yeah, though it sounds hokey/corny/take your pick, the sense of hope. I loved Bill Clinton. Still do. But watching this brought back so many memories. Some of regret that I never got to meet him personally.
Interesting that Matalin actually praised the campaign, and then I nodded, and thought there she IS when she stuck her finger down her throat, gagging on the song Clinton/Gore used for their campaign, but did also acknowledge how smart and effective it was.
I never remembered that Begala sported a beard back then. It seems he's still fond of Clinton, as is Carville. Again, huge smiles during their pieces.
I totally remember Bush looking down at his watch and the backlash he got for that, and also for calling Clinton and Gore "those two bozos."
I didn't know that a hot light nearly fell on Hillary after the 60 Minutes interview, and yeah, Clinton holding Hillary close after pulling her away from that? A very real moment.
I'm going to assume that George Stephanopoulos doesn't have any fond memories of Clinton? I was wondering if he would appear and what he would have to say, but, nope, no George.
And no lie, but I grinned when I saw Candy Crawley!
Maybe I'm biased, but I really liked this one. But really, can't CNN do a single show like this and NOT include that ass, Buchanan? Is that too much to ask?
But they didn't mention "It's the economy stupid" as a factor in that race. That was the major factor in Clinton winning, not Perot.
-
3
-
-
Did anyone else get the feeling that opinions about the feud broke down along racial lines?
Yes, unfortunately. If there were differing opinions I wish they showed them. This episode made me uncomfortable in an all-around way. She should've moved. She seemed to more of a sensitive, gentle person and this neighborhood was changing. And I don't mean racially but it was going rougher. I lived in a neighborhood and it started to change when a bunch of rough characters moved in. And they were white for what it's worth.
-
1
-
-
I watched the Clinton/Bush episode at 9 p.m.
-
This is off-topic, but heck I voted for Hillary so I'm not the people? Millions others too.
-
4
-
-
The one episode that I'm sort of looking forward to is music and MTV. And I know that if and when they do the 90's that Bill Clinton will be covered as some sort of combo of Nero and Caligula with plenty of talking heads from Newt Gingrich. Clinton was almost as popular as Reagan when he left office.
-
2
-
-
I was afraid of the Reagan episode and it seems like my fear was justified. They can be critical of every president since JFK but when it comes to Reagan its hands off. I was a teenager during the 80's. We weren't all Alex Keatons. His poll numbers did go down into the thirties a couple of times and after the missile treaties some conservatives referred to him as a useful idiot. I guess that wasn't covered.
-
5
-
-
IMO, it was really Dukakis's clinical response to the question that did him in, more than his opposition to the death penalty. Perhaps he should have gotten some pointers from Lloyd Bentsen ahead of time? But Dukakis's interviews in the program left me with the impression of someone a bit in love with his own high-mindedness... A politician could have slammed the questioner, or reminded everyone that he'd be devastated, if a loved one met such a violent end, that capital punishment doesn't bring the victims back, or said he'd learned from the Willie Horton case...but Michael Dukakis was above a dirty thing like politics.
FYI, the site for Commission on Presidential Debates has a transcript: Bush was give a one-minute rebuttal for responding to the "Kitty Dukakis" question.
I didn't remember he had a rebuttal for that. After reading it I know why I forgot about it.
-
I watched a bit of the Nixon v. Kennedy episode but didn't care for the actors used in the reenactments or the commentaries. I'm a bit of a recovering Kennedy obsessive and used to read pretty much every book about them I could get my hands on, starting in my teens. In the end, it really taught me a healthy skepticism of biographies and to very much consider the source.
As for JFK's record on civil rights, I don't get the sense it was some issue he felt super passionately about over the course of his life, but he did introduce the legislation that ended up becoming the Civil Rights Act of 1964, in June 1963. Before then, I'd say he often worried about the political blowback if he pushed for "too much" on racial issues, i.e. the election consequences in the South. The trip to Dallas was partly about mending political fences and making sure Texas stayed blue for his 1964 re-election bid.
Nixon was Eisenhower's VP and if people viewed Nixon as an extension of Ike and his civil rights record, then it's easy to see why the general view of Nixon was of someone friendly to the idea of racial equality. Of course, back then, they couldn't know how he talked in private.
Google Books has a November 1960 issue of Jet Magazine with a cover story about what each candidate promised black America.
As for RFK, I think he was a more passionate person in general and as the 1960s went on became more of a champion of the disadvantaged in all areas. But even before JFK's assassination, he made this prediction:
Despite my dissatisfaction with the Kennedy/Nixon installment, I've watched some of the others. I thought they'd do more with the famous "Dewey Defeats Truman" headline besides show a picture of it. What did you even hire reencators for, CNN? The guy they had as Truman seemed off to me, but they can't exactly bring in Gary Sinise for this sort of production. I found myself less distracted by the reenactments with the Jackson/Adams election, probably because there aren't moving images of the real people to ruin the comparisons.
Bush-Dukakis is the first election I remember, but my perspective is different now as an adult, so I liked revisiting it. I don't know why it surprised me that Dukakis is still alive, but some failed presidential candidates stay in the limelight after, while he kind of faded from the national scene. It always surprises me that he didn't react to the Bernard Shaw question with some amount of faux outrage at first, that a media member was engaging in such sensationalism and "gotcha" tactics, even if he ultimately reiterated his anti-death penalty itself. Dukakis didn't have to be all "let him fry" to give a better answer to that question.
Definitely, he should have just said where did you get your balls big enough to ask me that question Bernard?
-
1
-
-
Live Aid was for African famine relief. Nobody was doing dick for AIDS in the mid 80s. It was considered a disease that only affected gays and drug addicts and the prevailing attitude was that if you weren't one of those (which you're probably not, wink wink), then there's no reason to be concerned. Reagan set the pace by totally ignoring the epidemic because he didn't like who it was affecting, anyway. /end rant/
Live Aid was a huge event, though, and should definitely be covered. It was the first of the big charity concerts. I'm looking forward to a contemporary interview with Bob Geldoff. Haven't seen him in years.
I saw him in something recently. He just looks older. Don't we all; I guess.
-
I'm not that naive, in that I don't think that not everyone plays clean, if you will. I just couldn't understand why they couldn't be even handed, and I really, really resented Nixon being made to look like the more honest one. GAG. I laughed and rolled my eyes when I saw Pat Buchanan, because of COURSE! He was on in the Seventies, defending Nixon. I believe he also said Nixon should have destroyed the tapes.
The only really honest candidate I can see is Dukakis. Because he fired Sasso, who had leaked Biden's 'plagiarized' speech from the U.K. guy, whose name and title are escaping me now. And he refused to play dirty. I was really exhausted last night, so I still haven't seen the end of it yet. And I think, what a shame that Dukakis didn't win. Or that this show didn't try to get Rather to talk about his interview with then Presidential candidate Bush. I didn't see it as Bush winning at all, like that Fuller guy seemed to think he did. I remember that interview, and I remember my thinking, how pissed off Bush was, because he thought it was going to be about his candidacy and not about Iran-Contra and what he knew. Or how Reagan still wouldn't admit what he did.
I don't dislike Evan Thomas. I actually liked him in The Sixties. But here? In Nixon v. JFK? He clearly let his bias show, and he was the one who lumped the actual candidates with not giving any fucks about social issues, unlike the HONORABLE Nixon. So disappointing.
That race was right after I turned 18, so it was my first election. I'm ashamed to admit ((I can't believe I was soooo stupid) that I voted for that asshat Bush because of what he said: "Read my lips: No more taxes!" Even though my heart and gut were telling me to vote Dukakis. I"m still very much ashamed.
The Eighties: I can't wait for this week; they better do a thorough job--like how Reagan REFUSED to admit it was a crisis or do anyfuckingthing about it. I'm hoping that they will also talk about that AIDS concert in the summer of 1985. So much goodness.
I agree with a lot of what you say but I don't think that the concert in the summer of 1985 was for AIDS. Live Aid was for hunger and famine in Ethiopia. We Are the World and stuff like that. I also voted for Bush in '88 but my excuse is that I was 18 and my brain wasn't fully formed yet.
-
1
-
-
I came here to ask why on earth MSNBC is giving a platform to the washed-up and totally crackers Michele Bachmann, but I see I'm late to the party. With her thankfully out of sight, I'd forgotten about ol' crazy eyes, but MSNBC inexplicably felt the need to bring her back.
I used to have this network on every day, but it's degenerated so dreadfully. "The Place for Politics"? More like the place for a steaming pile of crap. I empathize with those who feel lost because they have no default channel to turn to in this election year. RIP, MSNBC.
Keith got crazy at times without a doubt but damn I miss those days now.
-
3
-
-
I didn't think too much of Rachel's leading with the story that there was an anonymous leak to WaPo about a possible SCOTUS vetting going on. What does it meeeeean?!? Nope, sorry. Not a story. A leak to WaPo is not a story. If the leaker wants to leak to you, that's different. Still not 'everybody freak out' level of story, but better. And anyhow, anybody who doesn't think the Sandoval leak wasn't Harry Reid trolling McConnell hasn't been paying attention. If that's the story you want to report on, then I'm with you.
Yeah, at this point Obama is not going to nominate a Republican unless they were they were the reincarnation of Earl Warren. Sometimes, way too much pearl-clutching and rending of garments here.
-
1
-
-
I had to change the channel during another version of her continuing amazement over Bernie's large crowds. She just got finished with a story about larger Republican turnout over the Democrats being a worrying issue and then that. It seems to me that the two kind of contradict. I voted for Hillary this time and supported Obama in 2008. He got the crowds in 2008 and now it's Bernie with the big rallies. Hillary got a lot of votes both times. Her voters should get some kind of acknowledgement. A little annoying is all I'm saying.
-
1
-
-
Oh for crying out loud. Rachel's show has become one long loud commercial for Bernie Sanders. The polls that show him ahead or even close are notable but those that show Clinton ahead are just dismissed. Bernie's organization in a couple of states is praiseworthy but let's mock Clinton for sending a high ranked surrogate to one of them. Big crowds for Bernie always get mentioned but never any coverage of Clinton's events unless it's something negative. It's really discouraging to see Rachel being so biased.
I think its the whole rooting for the underdog thing and the desire for a horse-race on both sides. They all seem to have fond memories of 2008. I don't; even though my "side" won.
-
1
-
-
The more I think about this Trump "town hall" thing the more I get annoyed. This has to be one of the more unethical jounalistic events that I can remember. They're his friggin' press agents at this point
-
8
-
-
I just read the link above about the GOP town halls this week.
I do understand the format of a town hall and CNN's splitting up the candidates over 2 nights.
Yet, am I missing something here.... Trump gets his own town hall, with Scarb and Mika?!
WTF.
How does one candidate who is not even president yet get a town hall all to themselves? This is some egregious bullshit.
-
7
-
-
Is Rachel working for the Hillary Clinton campaign? That's a facetious question, but given the frequency that HRC is on The Rachel Maddow Show, it's like Hillary is using it as unofficial medial channel. Anytime there is some controvery or issue surrounding Hillary's campaign, or if Bernie Sanders has said something Hillary doesn't like, there she is on the Rachel Maddow Show, giving her position.
I think that many people might believe that Rachel's personal politics would make her a Sanders supporter. I don't know who Rachel would vote for, and as a journalist she's not going to say. But clearly, she seems to be totally enamored of HRC as a person. Others on these forums have used the term "fan girl." I don't think the word "obsession" would be far fetched.
Many liberals think of MSNBC as the counter to mainstream media, but so far they have been no different than the networks in terms of their heavy emphasis on covering Hillary. Especially Rachel. Given this reality, I don't ever want to hear Rachel slamming Fox News for the amount of air time they give to Trump. Because Hillary is her Trump.
Sanders has been on a lot. I've seen plenty of interviews between Rachel and Bernie. She's fair.
-
5
-
This Is CNN (Vaulted)
in Political Network Talk
Yes, the 60's and 70's were much better. I kind of hope they don't do the 90's now after this performance. They'd screw it up.