A Weblog of Centrist Voices in American Politics
|
|
|
A Weblog of Centrist Voices in American Politics | |
|
February 22, 2005Back to Work, Laugh NeededThis cracks me up: Chris Rock explains comments ... sort of Don't you wish you could go to Vegas and place bets on things like "Chris Rock will not be invited to host the Oscars again next year"? The guy's nose just is not nearly brown enough for such a gig. It's a big part of what makes him funny when he is funny, and the huge reason why he's a choice that's not going to please the Academy. I hope I'm wrong... Posted by Brian Keegan at February 22, 2005 03:29 PM Comments
Rock is obviously not privy to the ongoing political correctness discussions that have swept the nation in the last several years. In all seriousness, despite his obvious tendancy to display humor through stereotypes, Rock does have a point. It's not a gay vs. straight thing--it's an average American thing. We just honestly don't care what awards Hollywood happens to be giving itself at the moment. This isn't the 1950's where an award actually meant something. There's practically an award show every week--the Academy Awards, the Oscars, People's Choice, Grammy's, Latin Grammy's, Eve, Soul, NAACP Image, the list is endless. American's may be stupid enough to keep "US" magazine alive, but thank goodness we seem to have woken up to the fact that Hollywood and its endless award shows don't mean squat to the future of our nation. Posted by: rah at February 22, 2005 04:22 PMbest thing the Academy's done in years. Posted by: Scott at February 22, 2005 04:25 PMI keep thinking that Rock is simply doing his best to stir up controversy to shore up the Academy Award's sagging ratings outlook. Posted by: Tully at February 22, 2005 04:43 PMMaybe we'll have a "Wardrobe malfunction" or two. That always spices up the ratings too! Posted by: chris at February 22, 2005 07:01 PMGreat idea Chris, but can I make a special request...please don't let the malfunction involve Michael Moore! Even with the new haircut, I think we'd be safe saying the view would be less than palatable. Posted by: rah at February 22, 2005 07:31 PMTully - aside: you could explain again briefly why raising the payroll tax cap won't do any good while inflows exceed outflows? Thx Posted by: Scott at February 22, 2005 07:35 PMI posted last night, or early this morning on what he said on Jay Posted by: Daniel at February 22, 2005 07:43 PMBrief? LOL. Scott, answer posted in the last open thread comment section. Posted by: Tully at February 22, 2005 09:08 PMThanks Tully. Yep, brief was a stretch. Posted by: Scott at February 22, 2005 09:26 PM |
Archives
March 2006
February 2006 January 2006 December 2005 November 2005 October 2005 September 2005 August 2005 July 2005 June 2005 May 2005 April 2005 March 2005 February 2005 January 2005 December 2004 November 2004 October 2004 September 2004 August 2004 July 2004 June 2004 May 2004 April 2004 March 2004 February 2004 January 2004 December 2003 November 2003 October 2003 September 2003 August 2003 July 2003 June 2003 May 2003 April 2003
Recent Entries
Dubai Out
Why So Long Between Democracies? Round One, Centrism Rock Lobster? Blackwell Releases "Worst-Treated" List "IRV" used in Burl., VT for mayor election. Great idea! Random Thread Election 2006: Round One A Proper Multiculturalism Bush proposes line item veto act - what's changed?
|
