Comments from hollywood [Archive] - The Orange Mane

View Full Version : Comments from hollywood

defenseman

02-22-2007, 01:01 AM

Here you go..

Wednesday, Feb. 21, 2007 2:28 p.m. EST
Hillary Furious at Hollywood

Hillary Clinton was reportedly "furious” at the three Hollywood moguls and Clinton "friends” who hosted Tuesday night’s fund-raiser for Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama.

Three of the entertainment industry’s biggest names – DreamWorks studio founders Steven Spielberg, Jeffrey Katzenberg and David Geffen – hosted the private Beverly Hills fund-raiser for Sen. Obama, and checks from Hollywood’s A-list of stars – including George Clooney, Eddie Murphy and Barbra Streisand – added up to a one-night take of $1 million.

The New York Post, quoting a source, said Sen. Clinton "was furious at the three, who she thought were her friends, for supporting her rival.”

The source said that someone in Clinton’s office even called Geffen.

"They were very angry [the moguls] were holding this event. They calmed down after an assurance was made that there would still be support and money left over for [Clinton].”

A Clinton spokesperson denied that anyone spoke to Geffen. As NewsMax reported on Tuesday, "Obama’s display of celebrity sizzle and campaign dollars challenges any assumptions that Hollywood dollars would default to Sen. Hillary Clinton, who has longstanding ties to the industry, along with her husband.”

In a further slight to Hillary, Geffen told New York Times columnist Maureen Dowd that Republicans "believe she's the easiest to defeat."

"It's not a very big thing to say, 'I made a mistake' on the war, and typical of Hillary Clinton that she can't," Dowd quotes Geffen as saying.

When asked if Obama can stand up to "Clinton Inc.," Geffen replied: "I hope so, because that machine is going to be very unpleasant and unattractive and effective."

© NewsMax 2007. All rights reserved

Bronco Bob

02-22-2007, 01:27 AM

You didn't bother to say WHY they were angry:

>> In the newspaper interview, Geffen also said Bill Clinton is "a reckless guy" and he does not think Hillary Clinton can bring the country together during a time of war, no matter how smart or ambitious she is.

The Clinton campaign demanded that Obama denounce comments made by the DreamWorks movie studio founder, who told New York Times columnist Maureen Dowd in Wednesday's editions that while "everybody in politics lies," the former president and his wife "do it with such ease, it's troubling."

For her part, New York Sen. Clinton sidestepped questions, leaving the issue to her aides to discuss.

"I'm just going to stay focused on my campaign and I'm going to run a positive campaign about the issues that affect the people in our country," she told The Associated Press in an interview in Nevada. She was participating a candidate forum in Carson City.

Another Democratic presidential candidate, New Mexico Gov. Bill Richardson, said at the candidate forum that Obama should denounce Geffen's comments. "We Democrats should all sign a pledge that we all be positive," Richardson said. <<

Blueflame

02-22-2007, 01:49 AM

NewsMax.... Hilarious! Ha! LOL

Stuck In Texas

02-22-2007, 06:41 AM

NewsMax.... Hilarious! Ha! LOL

Does the source make the story "less true"?

Bronco_Beerslug

02-22-2007, 06:52 AM

Does the source make the story "less true"?In the case of Fox and Newsmax there is a good chance it does.

defenseman

02-22-2007, 08:46 AM

Does the source make the story "less true"?

And other sources via the same media as newmax aren't biased? Sure they are.....and I'm doubting this story is untrue, sounds quite true to form wouldn't you say? Geffen did release additional statements by the way, emphasizing that he said exactly what he said. I'm guessing that was obama's retort to broomhillary...Honestly, I don't like the tactic either. never would condone it. They gotta get obama in the box so the american people don't have to put up with this sort of verbal "tennis".......dman

Bronco Bob

02-22-2007, 10:57 AM

And other sources via the same media as newmax aren't biased? Sure they are.....and I'm doubting this story is untrue, sounds quite true to form wouldn't you say?

What bothered me about the article isn't what was said. It was what wasn't
said. The slant of the article was that Hillary's camp was just being jealous
and whiney because Geffen was giving Obama money. What the article
neglected to say was that Geffen was badmouthing Bill and Hillary, and
this was the real reason the Clinton camp was angry.

Spider

02-22-2007, 12:03 PM

Does the source make the story "less true"?

is water wet ? Fox, Newsmax, Drudge , leave alot of out of their pieces ........
Daily Show with Jon Stewart , a comedy show is more accurate , then those news sources I mentioned .........

defenseman

02-22-2007, 12:04 PM

What bothered me about the article isn't what was said. It was what wasn't
said. The slant of the article was that Hillary's camp was just being jealous
and whiney because Geffen was giving Obama money. What the article
neglected to say was that Geffen was badmouthing Bill and Hillary, and
this was the real reason the Clinton camp was angry.

Well aware of what geffen said, and they all (media) gleen as necessary off the top to get the right spin, been doing it for years..dman

Spider

02-22-2007, 12:05 PM

What bothered me about the article isn't what was said. It was what wasn't
said. The slant of the article was that Hillary's camp was just being jealous
and whiney because Geffen was giving Obama money. What the article
neglected to say was that Geffen was badmouthing Bill and Hillary, and
this was the real reason the Clinton camp was angry.

and the right always wonders why I make fun of them ......... I was in this camp also , until lthe Ship loaded with WMD floating around aimlessly at sea to hide the WMD story broke ,then I went and checked the Stories from world daily net , newsmax and Fox , found out they was bullshítting .........

Crushaholic

02-22-2007, 01:41 PM

In the case of Drudge, he does SOME original news reporting. Most of his site is just links to news stories on other sites...

defenseman

02-22-2007, 02:20 PM

is water wet ? Fox, Newsmax, Drudge , leave alot of out of their pieces ........
Daily Show with Jon Stewart , a comedy show is more accurate , then those news sources I mentioned .........

Sure they are...dman

DBruleU

02-22-2007, 02:27 PM

Spider

02-22-2007, 02:28 PM

You know you have problems when you take Colbert, or the Daily Show with more accuracy than Fox.

you can blame that on fox ......... I didnt tell them to bullshít everyone

Meck77

02-22-2007, 02:36 PM

Obama has Oprah What more does he need?

Seems like every woman I know has said "I'd vote for Oprah if she was running"

Hell Oprah alone could finance Obama.

Obama/Oprah ticket? Watch out! http://www.cafepress.com/oprahobama08

Rascal

02-22-2007, 02:46 PM

NewsMax.... Hilarious! Ha! LOL

Prove it's wrong.

Been reported at several other news agencies as well such as MSNBC and left wing CNN.

Crushaholic

02-22-2007, 02:48 PM

Meck77

02-22-2007, 02:53 PM

We could have Dr. Phil be Secretary of State. He'll get those bullies in the Middle East to stop being so mean to us...:rofl:

I'd seriously consider moving to Mexico with Baja if Dr. Phil rose to power.

Blueflame

02-22-2007, 03:28 PM

Does the source make the story "less true"?

Give me a break... the conservatives on this forum would not accept articles from Democrats.com, Buzzflash, or Bartcop as credible ("biased source", y'know), regardless of "truth in the article", so of course, you're gonna get the same reaction from the liberals to articles from the overtly biased NewsMax. If NewsMax told me the sky was blue at noon on a 90-degree August day, I'd probably have to go outside to check and be sure...

They've worked very hard to earn their reputation...

Blueflame

02-22-2007, 03:30 PM

Prove it's wrong.

Been reported at several other news agencies as well such as MSNBC and left wing CNN.

Point is, NewsMax is making a mountain out of a molehill. Primary election campaigns become contentious... that's to be expected. This is much ado about nothing.

Rascal

02-22-2007, 04:35 PM

Hardly. Newsmax isn't the only place to be talking about it, and couple of days ago similar stories were on the front page of CNN and MSNBC.

Care to try again?

Bronco Bob

02-22-2007, 04:40 PM

Hardly. Newsmax isn't the only place to be talking about it, and couple of days ago similar stories were on the front page of CNN and MSNBC.

Care to try again?

I don't think the dispute is that there was friction between the Obama camp
and the Clinton camp. I think the dispute was the spin Newsmax put on it
as to the reason for the dispute. And this is nothing as compared to the
mudslinging between Bush and McCain in 2000.

Spider

02-22-2007, 04:41 PM

I don't think the dispute is that there was friction between the Obama camp
and the Clinton camp. I think the dispute was the spin Newsmax put on it
as to the reason for the dispute. And this is nothing as compared to the
mudslinging between Bush and McCain in 2000.
yup ............ Newsmax screwed the story up , par for the course for newsmax, Fox, Drudge , World daily net ...........

Rascal

02-22-2007, 04:43 PM

What spin?

LOL...never said anything about Bush or McCain. Typical of lefties to bring it up though.

BTW...http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,1592614,00.html?cnn=yes

cutthemdown

02-22-2007, 04:43 PM

I love primaries. Primaries are when you fight with your brother in the backyard.

Blueflame

02-22-2007, 04:44 PM

Hardly. Newsmax isn't the only place to be talking about it, and couple of days ago similar stories were on the front page of CNN and MSNBC.

Care to try again?
I know... NewsMax would much rather comment on a non-issue such as pre-primary bickering between the Democratic front-runners than to focus on real news like the Libby trial or the awful conditions at Walter Reed hospital.

I'm sure Ghouliani and McCain will be too civil to get into any muckraking, though.

Rascal

02-22-2007, 04:46 PM

Bronco Bob

02-22-2007, 04:48 PM

What spin?

LOL...never said anything about Bush or McCain. Typical of lefties to bring it up though.

BTW...http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,1592614,00.html?cnn=yes

Typical of the Bushies to think only disputes happen between Democrats.
And you never did bother to address my first point.

Rascal

02-22-2007, 04:52 PM

Typical of the Bushies to think only disputes happen between Democrats.
And you never did bother to address my first point.

Never said disputes don't happen between republicans. I posted articles saying otherwise just the other day.

What would your first point be?

Blueflame

02-22-2007, 04:56 PM

LOL

Then why was it on the front page of CNN and now an article in Times? Clearly it's all Newsmax. Hillarious!

At least they are focusing on politics unlike CNN which is focused on the Smiths' body BS.
It's not surprising to me that the American corporate media has devolved into essentially a clone of what the National Enquirer used to be.

Hey, at least the NYT thought this story merited the ink...

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/02/22/washington/22military.html?_r=3&hp&oref=slogin&oref=slogin&oref=slogin

Excerpt:
"“We’re behind the power curve, and we can’t piddle around,” Maj. Gen. Harry M. Wyatt III, commander of the Oklahoma National Guard, said in an interview. He added that one-third of his soldiers lacked the M-4 rifles preferred by active-duty soldiers and that there were also shortfalls in night vision goggles and other equipment."

Rascal

02-22-2007, 04:59 PM

It's not surprising to me that the American corporate media has devolved into essentially a clone of what the National Enquirer used to be.

Hey, at least the NYT thought this story merited the ink...

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/02/22/washington/22military.html?_r=3&hp&oref=slogin&oref=slogin&oref=slogin

Excerpt:
"“We’re behind the power curve, and we can’t piddle around,” Maj. Gen. Harry M. Wyatt III, commander of the Oklahoma National Guard, said in an interview. He added that one-third of his soldiers lacked the M-4 rifles preferred by active-duty soldiers and that there were also shortfalls in night vision goggles and other equipment."

I thought it was only Nesmax that went down the ****ter? LOL

Rest of the post isn't relevant no matter how disgusting it is.

TailgateNut

02-22-2007, 05:02 PM

It's not surprising to me that the American corporate media has devolved into essentially a clone of what the National Enquirer used to be.

Hey, at least the NYT thought this story merited the ink...

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/02/22/washington/22military.html?_r=3&hp&oref=slogin&oref=slogin&oref=slogin

Excerpt:
"“We’re behind the power curve, and we can’t piddle around,” Maj. Gen. Harry M. Wyatt III, commander of the Oklahoma National Guard, said in an interview. He added that one-third of his soldiers lacked the M-4 rifles preferred by active-duty soldiers and that there were also shortfalls in night vision goggles and other equipment."

They don't need guns and nightvision goggles. They were sent there by Bushco to keep the money flowing to George's and Dick's corporate interests.

They have basically mortgaged the country to insure corporate profits for their friends.

Right now only the soldiers and their families are paying, but everyone will be paying dearly soon enough. Then of course they'll blame it on the Democrat who raises taxes.

Blueflame

02-22-2007, 05:17 PM

I thought it was only Nesmax that went down the ****ter? LOL

Rest of the post isn't relevant no matter how disgusting it is.

NewsMax's content is Republican propaganda spun for the consumption of Republicans. Its bias is instantly discernible and therefore, to a non-Republican, it is a joke. As is Fox.

The rest of the corporate media is also little more than infotainment. Every second spent covering the likes of Britney Spears and Anna Nicole Smith is a second that they're not covering important stories that do affect our country.

As to the irrelevance of the rest of my post, I couldn't disagree more. When a president is sending troops to war with inadequate training and lacking essential supplies, I think that's what a real news outlet should be reporting... on the front page, above the fold.

defenseman

02-22-2007, 09:58 PM

spdirty

02-22-2007, 11:32 PM

They don't need guns and nightvision goggles. They were sent there by Bushco to keep the money flowing to George's and Dick's corporate interests.

They have basically mortgaged the country to insure corporate profits for their friends.

Right now only the soldiers and their families are paying, but everyone will be paying dearly soon enough. Then of course they'll blame it on the Democrat who raises taxes.

do you have a frickin clue as to when the M4 started to be used in the military? If they don't have M4s they have 16's which are fine. Takes a while to sift through the beaurocratic bs before everyone gets it. ::) Just because they don't have the M4 doesn't mean ::) George and Dick are sending them into battle with spitballs and straws.::) The M4 is frickin sweet though.

As for the shortfalls in the NVGs, the batteries probably ran out and the Army doesn't know how to change em, so they have to call an Airman to do it.