silly silly
The fact that the USSR completely collapsed 4 years after this aired shows how ridiculous the premise was. simply cold-war Reagan-era paranoia..so much for the "liberal media".
shareRE: "The fact that the USSR completely collapsed 4 years after this aired shows how ridiculous the premise was."
The idea that the Soviets could have defeated the U.S. in armed conflict at any time during the 1980's is a stretch in hindsight (Reagan and Thatcher's forceful military buildups played a part in this); the idea that a communist (or otherwise anti-American) takeover can come from our own politicians is always a distant possibility-- thank God for Chappaquiddick-- but 'Amerika' is a useful film if (for no other reason) it serves as a reminder of the type of totalitarian hell communist regimes bring to the populace they claim to fight for. From the U.S.S.R. to Cuba, North Korea, Vietnam, Laos, China, Zimbabwe, Nicaragua, and on..., no other political ideology has so completely killed, imprisoned and generally destroyed more innocent lives than communism, not to mention the fact that the very IDEA of communism (that the will of an individual can or should be subjugated by force to the will of a larger populace) runs horrendously counter to the free will and individuality that man has been given by his Creator. And that's a big f'in PERIOD!
RE: "simply cold-war Reagan-era paranoia"
A little like Clinton's nonsensical ramblings about the great threat that the right-wing militias posed to the U.S. in the '90's, despite their tiny numbers, disorganized nature and lack of sufficient funding. Meanwhile, Ossama Bin Laden declares war on the U.S. in 1995, attacks our embassies in Kenya and Tanzania in '98, attacks the U.S. Cole in '00, and Slick Willy is too busy getting blow jobs and meddling in Serbian wars (on the side of the Islamic fanatics, no less) to pay him any attention. We wouldn't want to risk offending Muslims by fighting back against the jihadists, now would we, Billy-boy?
RE: "so much for the "liberal media"."
You mean the very same media that fawned over Michael Moore's idiotic film last year (count the 4 and 31/2 star reviews and compare them to reviews of Amerika and Red Dawn if you doubt me) as if it were based on anything other than his delusional socialist fantasies?
The same liberal media (CBS) that ran a story accusing Pres. Bush of dodging his duties in the National Guard using FORGED documents that turned out to be plants from a noted Bush opponent, a story produced by a woman with known connections to the DNC? It was a huge scandal, she got fired, CBS was shamed into admitting guilt by the vigilent blogger community, Dan Rather stepped down a bit earlier than was previously thought, etc...
Surely you remember this? No?
Well, most lefties can't correctly remember what happened in this country even yesterday much less several whole months ago, so I'll let you slide on that one.
"Timothy Dalton should get an Oscar...AND BEAT SEAN CONNERY OVER THE HEAD WITH IT!!!"
BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
talk about "nonsensical ramblings"
Ouch!!
What an comeback, the way you countered my facts with a four-word scrawl and a "laugh line".
I bow to your vast intellectual capabilities (and massive tax hikes), blue-state overlord.
Remember that infant-type outbursts are all that liberals have instead of reason.
the line from Jack Nicholson has in "As Good as it Gets" apply to liberals even more than women:
"How do you write Liberals so well?"
"I think of a conservative, and take away reason, and accountability."
It's Lieberal.
"I'm a vehemently anti-nuclear, paranoid mess, harbouring a strange obsession with radioactive sheep."
Clinton's nonsensical ramblings about the great threat that the right-wing militias posed to the U.S. in the '90's
Hmmm. Looks like somebody forgot about all the dead Americans at the Ok. City bombing.
Of course, what else would you expect from a wingnut.
"Hmmm. Looks like somebody forgot about all the dead Americans at the Ok. City bombing. Of course, what else would you expect from a wingnut."
Oh noes, the Neo Con goes down for the count!!!
Ok wasn't done by a Militia.
Do it! because we're just ONE!
RE: "Ok wasn't done by a Militia."
No it wasn't, but when has blaming a crime on it's actual perpetrator ever mattered to a left-wingers, the keepers of moral relativism in the modern world (it's the cops fault...it's society's fault... it's "economic disparity" that caused the crime...the evil jews are to blame and their Neocon allies...Bush lied, but it's okay for Clinton because "everyone does it"...yada, yada, *beep* yada)?
My original point stands as to Clinton's negligence in all matters of national security during the '90's, backed up by his dubious list of concerns during his 8-yr. presidency: battling cigarette companies, Microsoft, and the Minutemen, slaughtering dozens of harmless kooks in Waco, bombing Christian Serbs to the aid of Muslim seperatist guerillas in Kosovo, and "freeing" a little boy from his loving relatives in Miami to return him to the same communist hellhole his mother had died trying to save him from...
As well as his glaring derelections of duty: Ignoring the original 1995 declaration of war on the U.S. by OBL (itself a cause for military action, re: Noriega) and his several subsequent actions against us like his murderous bombings of U.S. soldiers in Saudi Arabia in 1996, the American embassy in 1998 in Kenya and Tanzania, or the USS Cole in 2000, ALL WHILE TREATING TERRORISM AS (of all Goddam things) A LAW-ENFORCEMENT ISSUE RATHER THAN A MILITARY CONCERN!!!
The fact is that Clinton, like most modern-day Democrats just didn't give a damn about protecting his country from it's enemies.
"Timothy Dalton should get an Oscar...AND BEAT SEAN CONNERY OVER THE HEAD WITH IT!!!"
I think a lot people forget that the move Amerika is more of a story about two different familes and the love bounds between them - blah blah blah... the Cold War and the US vs USSR was simply a back drop.
"They call him the giggler, he laughs when he runs."
You mean like the Bushes still doing business with the damn Saudis-who funded, planned out, and carried out the 9/11 attacks that the right wing go on about so much. OR did I miss the part when the Bushes cut off ties with their Saudi oil friends. If you want to say the Democrats don't protect this country that's fine, that's your opinion-BUT don't even say that the Republicans do-they use the military like a whore in a brothel. Cut their pay, cut their funding, send them into combat without the proper equipment, too few soldiers to do the job-all while telling them they are behind them when they are not. You want to make blanket statements about the Dems OK, but here's mine about the Republicans--they don't give a damn about this country as long as they can make MONEY. It is disgusting the way they treat our soldiers--they should never have to worry about whether their loved ones at home can make the mortgage payment or not, but they do-why so the damn oil companies can have record profits while getting tax breaks from the government. Our soldiers are the best in the world-they should get the pay that reflects that-instead they get Bush closing 7 VA hospitals and trying to charge the soldiers in hospital in Germany for their meals(fortunately that plan fell apart when it became public). BOTH parties don't care about any of this because it doesn't keep them in power or wealth. If you want me to get all partisan on you I could point out that Clinton spent less time than he should have on foreign affairs fending off attacks from the right-wing(the same type of attacks now considered bad form to bring up lest it distract the President from matters of foreign relations).
shareYou may be absolutely right.
But I've explained it this way:
The republicans want to sell off the country,
the democrats just want to give it away.
If the libertarians could get rid of the idiot stoners, they may just have a chance.
Refusal to believe does not negate the truth.