Q: How insanely paranoid is Andrew O’Hehir’s review of the movie Secretariat?
And Ebert is about as far let as it gets.
Ebert’s article starts thus:
Andrew O’Hehir of Salon is a critic I admire, but he has nevertheless written a review of “Secretariat” so bizarre I cannot allow it to pass unnoticed. I don’t find anywhere in “Secretariat” the ideology he discovers there. In its reasoning, his review resembles a fevered conspiracy theory.
Read the whole thing along with Ebert’s review of the film here.
Of course if you prefer your red meat from a red source there is always John Nolte at Big Hollywood who says:
O’Hehir’s divisive, race-bating language should look familiar to you. This is what the Left does when they’re losing power and out of attractive ideas to launch any kind of comeback. It’s the language of desperate left-wing politicians and their media allies when facing everyday Americans with the temerity to speak out against ObamaCare and a failed stimulus in townhall meetings; it’s the language of White House surrogates desperate to dishonestly shame into silence the millions who organized Tea Parties after waking up to the nightmarish realization that Obama wasn’t kidding about fundamentally transforming America, and now O’Hehir has opened up this new front.
I had no interest in this movie, I was alive when this happened. The Horse ran and won, but I’m tempted to do so just to make him go Kryten
This was an update to my comparison post on OneNation but it is worthy of a promotion.
A commentator at the HuffPo Tunes 59 kindly linked to me using the post to refute the Huffington Post’s claims on the rally. Another commentator Kathy 001 took exception saying:
“LOL! Honey, there are more site that peddle cr@p on the internet than post actual facts. Find yourself a valid source.”
Apparently according to Kathy I am not a valid source. Perhaps Kathy can educate my sadly deceived readers: Are you maintaining my short film from 9/12 is false and/or didn’t happen? Why or Why not?
Do you maintain that the crowd photos from Becks and One Nation are not authentic? If so why?
Do you maintain that the YouTube videos I linked are false? Do you deny the trash was left? If so why?
What is it about me that makes me a bad source? What other of my videos on youtube do you find false? Why?
My readers anxiously await enlightenment oh wise one.
You might ask why is one upset liberal at HuffPo worth a post here. Two reasons.
1. If the left is getting angry over stuff I’ve put up then I’m doing something right.
2. Think about it. The post in question is made up of simple YouTube videos and links to photos. Kathy makes a blanket pronouncement that the source is poor, why, because if people on the left actually see these photos and videos then they have to explain both the unimpressive turnout and the trash left all over the mall and the WW2 memorial. It can’t be easily explained away. Thus the cry is “Pay no attention to the man in the Fedora behind the curtain.”
This is what the left is reduced to when they no longer control the gates to information. This in a nutshell is what happens at the MSM every day <a href="A commentator at the HuffPo Tunes 59 kindly linked to me using the post to refute the Huffington Post’s claims on the rally. A commentator Kathy 001 took exception saying:”>when they ignore stories that are off message.