“Who does he think he is”
-
By the way, speaking of getting paid...did DeNiro pay for all that "security," the mics, amps, etc?
-
By the way, speaking of getting paid...did DeNiro pay for all that "security," the mics, amps, etc?
@George-K said in “Who does he think he is”:
By the way, speaking of getting paid...did DeNiro pay for all that "security," the mics, amps, etc?
He's almost certainly funded by George Soros.
-
@Doctor-Phibes said in “Who does he think he is”:
What's the difference between de Niro doing this and some talking head doing it? What gives say Carlson or Maddow or Coulter more insight than him?
Well, that can be said about just anyone, can't it?
The only difference is that some people have a platform and get paid to do it, while others
hang out at TNCRjust vent shit without anyone asking.@George-K said in “Who does he think he is”:
@Doctor-Phibes said in “Who does he think he is”:
What's the difference between de Niro doing this and some talking head doing it? What gives say Carlson or Maddow or Coulter more insight than him?
Well, that can be said about just anyone, can't it?
The only difference is that some people have a platform and get paid to do it, while others
hang out at TNCRjust vent shit without anyone asking.So who do they think they are? The fact that somebody is apparently willing to pay Tucker Carlson to spout his crap doesn't actually make it any more appealing than de Niro, who is doing it gratis.
-
@George-K said in “Who does he think he is”:
@Doctor-Phibes said in “Who does he think he is”:
What's the difference between de Niro doing this and some talking head doing it? What gives say Carlson or Maddow or Coulter more insight than him?
Well, that can be said about just anyone, can't it?
The only difference is that some people have a platform and get paid to do it, while others
hang out at TNCRjust vent shit without anyone asking.So who do they think they are? The fact that somebody is apparently willing to pay Tucker Carlson to spout his crap doesn't actually make it any more appealing than de Niro, who is doing it gratis.
@Doctor-Phibes said in “Who does he think he is”:
The fact that somebody is apparently willing to pay Tucker Carlson to spout his crap doesn't actually make it any more appealing than de Niro, who is doing it gratis.
De gustibus....
But, I see your point.
Now, what makes DeNiro more appealing than, say, any person here who hates Trump?
AFAICT, nothing other than money and viewership.
But, then, we're arguing about price, right?
"Now look here, you Baltic gas passer... " - Mik, 6/14/08
The saying, "Lite is just one damn thing after another," is a gross understatement. The damn things overlap.
-
ETA: Would you agree that Maddow, Carlson, and others have more credibility than DeNiro?
You have more credibility than I do when it comes to engineering - why is that? Training, experience, access and exposure.
Same can be said about any pundit vs any actor.
"Now look here, you Baltic gas passer... " - Mik, 6/14/08
The saying, "Lite is just one damn thing after another," is a gross understatement. The damn things overlap.
-
ETA: Would you agree that Maddow, Carlson, and others have more credibility than DeNiro?
You have more credibility than I do when it comes to engineering - why is that? Training, experience, access and exposure.
Same can be said about any pundit vs any actor.
@George-K said in “Who does he think he is”:
ETA: Would you agree that Maddow, Carlson, and others have more credibility than DeNiro?
You have more credibility than I do when it comes to engineering - why is that? Training, experience, access and exposure.
Same can be said about any pundit vs any actor.
Remember that footballer telling us that IVF and surrogacy was the work of the devil?
I was called an asshole for saying he didn't know what the fuck he was talking about.
I was only joking
-
ETA: Would you agree that Maddow, Carlson, and others have more credibility than DeNiro?
You have more credibility than I do when it comes to engineering - why is that? Training, experience, access and exposure.
Same can be said about any pundit vs any actor.
-
@George-K said in “Who does he think he is”:
ETA: Would you agree that Maddow, Carlson, and others have more credibility than DeNiro?
You have more credibility than I do when it comes to engineering - why is that? Training, experience, access and exposure.
Same can be said about any pundit vs any actor.
Remember that footballer telling us that IVF and surrogacy was the work of the devil?
I was called an asshole for saying he didn't know what the fuck he was talking about.
Sorry, dupe
-
@George-K said in “Who does he think he is”:
more credibility than DeNiro?
"If he gets in, he will never leave"
"Forget about elections, that stuff is over"
His credibility is well established.
@Copper said in “Who does he think he is”:
@George-K said in “Who does he think he is”:
more credibility than DeNiro?
"If he gets in, he will never leave"
"Forget about elections, that stuff is over"
His credibility is well established.
Yeah, he's clearly jumped the old sharknado.
-
@George-K said in “Who does he think he is”:
ETA: Would you agree that Maddow, Carlson, and others have more credibility than DeNiro?
You have more credibility than I do when it comes to engineering - why is that? Training, experience, access and exposure.
Same can be said about any pundit vs any actor.
Remember that footballer telling us that IVF and surrogacy was the work of the devil?
I was called an asshole for saying he didn't know what the fuck he was talking about.
@Doctor-Phibes said in “Who does he think he is”:
I was called an asshole for saying he didn't know what the fuck he was talking about.
Not by me, I'm proud to say.
But the point is that when it comes to knowing what you're talking about...
Maddow/Hannity/Carlson > DeNiro/Me/You
"Now look here, you Baltic gas passer... " - Mik, 6/14/08
The saying, "Lite is just one damn thing after another," is a gross understatement. The damn things overlap.
-
@Doctor-Phibes said in “Who does he think he is”:
I was called an asshole for saying he didn't know what the fuck he was talking about.
Not by me, I'm proud to say.
But the point is that when it comes to knowing what you're talking about...
Maddow/Hannity/Carlson > DeNiro/Me/You
@George-K said in “Who does he think he is”:
But the point is that when it comes to knowing what you're talking about...
Maddow/Hannity/Carlson > DeNiro/Me/You
I'm not convinced by that. What Carlsen said when he visited Russia about how wonderfully cheap their food was either abjectly stupid or cynically appalling. Either way, it wasn't good.
Talking heads have a habit of continuing to talk as though they're experts way outside their area of expertise. Just listen to them talk about climate change, for example. Sure, there's controversy, and there's almost certainly some bias to the science. Still, do these people really understand the scientific models they're so happy to support/denigrate?
-
@George-K said in “Who does he think he is”:
But the point is that when it comes to knowing what you're talking about...
Maddow/Hannity/Carlson > DeNiro/Me/You
I'm not convinced by that. What Carlsen said when he visited Russia about how wonderfully cheap their food was either abjectly stupid or cynically appalling. Either way, it wasn't good.
Talking heads have a habit of continuing to talk as though they're experts way outside their area of expertise. Just listen to them talk about climate change, for example. Sure, there's controversy, and there's almost certainly some bias to the science. Still, do these people really understand the scientific models they're so happy to support/denigrate?
@Doctor-Phibes said in “Who does he think he is”:
I'm not convinced by that. What Carlsen said when he visited Russia about how wonderfully cheap their food was either abjectly stupid or cynically appalling. Either way, it wasn't good.
Oh geez, I agree with you. That was almost the apex of asshole-ery.
But, you're cherry picking Carlson without addressing her constant pushing the "RUSSIA" story.
Both are bullshit, of course.
Perhaps the bigger question is: "Why do we listen to 'pundits'?" Do they have more cred than The Dixie Chicks? If so, why?
-
@Doctor-Phibes said in “Who does he think he is”:
I'm not convinced by that. What Carlsen said when he visited Russia about how wonderfully cheap their food was either abjectly stupid or cynically appalling. Either way, it wasn't good.
Oh geez, I agree with you. That was almost the apex of asshole-ery.
But, you're cherry picking Carlson without addressing her constant pushing the "RUSSIA" story.
Both are bullshit, of course.
Perhaps the bigger question is: "Why do we listen to 'pundits'?" Do they have more cred than The Dixie Chicks? If so, why?
@George-K said in “Who does he think he is”:
Perhaps the bigger question is: "Why do we listen to 'pundits'?" Do they have more cred than The Dixie Chicks? If so, why?
Well, for one thing, they have a team of writers. They also have an agenda, which might not even be their own. They are selling us a story.
The main reason we listen to them is because they're good at talking, and in many cases because they confirm or affirm what we already believe.
-
@George-K said in “Who does he think he is”:
Perhaps the bigger question is: "Why do we listen to 'pundits'?" Do they have more cred than The Dixie Chicks? If so, why?
Well, for one thing, they have a team of writers. They also have an agenda, which might not even be their own. They are selling us a story.
The main reason we listen to them is because they're good at talking, and in many cases because they confirm or affirm what we already believe.
@Doctor-Phibes said in “Who does he think he is”:
Well, for one thing, they have a team of writers. They also have an agenda, which might not even be their own. They are selling us a story.
The main reason we listen to them is because they're good at talking, and in many cases because they confirm or affirm what we already believe.
Yes, that's sort of what I alluded to earlier (about being paid to opine). And yeah, though not being paid to promote it, the fact that DeNiro appeared in NYC at Trump's trial certainly points to him having an agenda. Maybe that makes him more honest, FWIW. He's probably a true believer.
DeNiro and I have the same amount of credibility. The difference is that, although neither of us (presumably) have writers, he has more national visibility than I do.
Why does that make him more credible than me?
Shouldn't he just shut up and act?
-
By the way, Murray makes an interesting point about actors and others and their spouting political opinions.
DeNiro, at this point doesn't probably care if his rants about Trump hurt his career. He's bullet-proof.
See my Dennis Quaid thread about implication of political expression. He spoke, reluctantly, in favor of Trump, and he's playing Reagan in an upcoming movie.
I would think that a large proportion of the public, when it comes to art, will say, "Yeah, he's a good singer, but he's a 4-star shithead because of his politics" and ignore it?
I don't know.
"Now look here, you Baltic gas passer... " - Mik, 6/14/08
The saying, "Lite is just one damn thing after another," is a gross understatement. The damn things overlap.
-
By the way, Murray makes an interesting point about actors and others and their spouting political opinions.
DeNiro, at this point doesn't probably care if his rants about Trump hurt his career. He's bullet-proof.
See my Dennis Quaid thread about implication of political expression. He spoke, reluctantly, in favor of Trump, and he's playing Reagan in an upcoming movie.
I would think that a large proportion of the public, when it comes to art, will say, "Yeah, he's a good singer, but he's a 4-star shithead because of his politics" and ignore it?
I don't know.
@George-K said in “Who does he think he is”:
By the way, Murray makes an interesting point about actors and others and their spouting political opinions.
DeNiro, at this point doesn't probably care if his rants about Trump hurt his career. He's bullet-proof.
See my Dennis Quaid thread about implication of political expression. He spoke, reluctantly, in favor of Trump, and he's playing Reagan in an upcoming movie.
I would think that a large proportion of the public, when it comes to art, will say, "Yeah, he's a good singer, but he's a 4-star shithead because of his politics" and ignore it?
I don't know.
I think there's a definite tendency for people to support celebrities talking about serious topics when they agree with what the celebrity is saying. Suddenly, we move from 'Who does he thing he is?' to 'Such wise words from a non-expert!'.
-
@Doctor-Phibes said in “Who does he think he is”:
The fact that somebody is apparently willing to pay Tucker Carlson to spout his crap doesn't actually make it any more appealing than de Niro, who is doing it gratis.
De gustibus....
But, I see your point.
Now, what makes DeNiro more appealing than, say, any person here who hates Trump?
AFAICT, nothing other than money and viewership.
But, then, we're arguing about price, right?
@George-K said in “Who does he think he is”:
@Doctor-Phibes said in “Who does he think he is”:
The fact that somebody is apparently willing to pay Tucker Carlson to spout his crap doesn't actually make it any more appealing than de Niro, who is doing it gratis.
De gustibus....
But, I see your point.
Now, what makes DeNiro more appealing than, say, any person here who hates Trump?
Any person hear would be able to make a better argument than Trump will be a dictator., they wouldn’t need to read the speech off of cards, and they would have delivered the speech much better.
-
By the way, Murray makes an interesting point about actors and others and their spouting political opinions.
DeNiro, at this point doesn't probably care if his rants about Trump hurt his career. He's bullet-proof.
See my Dennis Quaid thread about implication of political expression. He spoke, reluctantly, in favor of Trump, and he's playing Reagan in an upcoming movie.
I would think that a large proportion of the public, when it comes to art, will say, "Yeah, he's a good singer, but he's a 4-star shithead because of his politics" and ignore it?
I don't know.
@George-K said in “Who does he think he is”:
I would think that a large proportion of the public, when it comes to art, will say, "Yeah, he's a good singer, but he's a 4-star shithead because of his politics" and ignore it?
It's not being a shit-head that I find disappointing as much as how stupid they often appear. What de Niro said is just plain dumb.
Of course, there are others - just to pick one seemingly at random, the only reason most normal people have heard of Ted Nugent in the last twenty years is because of his non-musical activities. De Niro clearly doesn't need the publicity in the same way.
