Roger Ebert on Ron Paul

[paulaholic]

It is no doubt unfair of Cohen to victimize a perfectly nice man like Ron Paul. Watching Paul politely trying to deal with this weirdo made me reflect that as a fringe candidate, he has probably been subjected to a lot of strange questions on strange TV shows and probably is prepared to sit through almost anything for TV exposure. However, he has made a lot of intolerant comments about homosexuals, so by shouting “queer!” as he stalks out along a hotel corridor, he lost his chance of making amends. Helpful rule: If you find you have been the subject of a TV ambush, the camera is probably still rolling.

As a amateur movie critic, Roger Ebert is one of my heroes, as is Ron Paul, of course. Hearing one of them acknowledge the other was pretty cool.

What ignorant comments has Ron made about homosexuals? Roger is a liberal and probably assumes this of Paul solely because of the (R) next to his name.

That being said, if Ron really did say "queer" after the interview, that was a very stupid thing to do.

 

[Golding]

It's interesting to see people critical of behavior that they would probably also do in the same situation. I'm confused what the problem is if he said "That guy's a queer"? Isn't the Bruno character supposed to be queer?

Is it not nice to say queer? Should he have said, "That guy is gay"? "That guy is homosexual"? "That guy is a male who has sex with males?" That last one legitimately seems to be the popular push in college classes nowadays, actually.

I was in a microbiology class where a guy said the term "homosexual" is offensive, and that "gay" was more preferred. I would have thought it'd be the other way around. Hard to keep the lingo straight when you're being groped by one, I'd imagine.

 

[Sandra]

But even when a homosexual is accosted by another man, he'll shout "you queer!" It's an uninvited attack.

 

[StayTrue]

I think the word queer is semi-accepted and not as offensive as fag.

Queer can be mean weird

 

[Sandra]

Paulaholic, you aren't aware that Bruno is not looked upon kindly by the gay community.

 

[Arklatex]

He didn't call him a name, he said a phrase, as the blazes i think.

 

[rp4prez]

any word you use could be considered "bad" depending on who is saying the word is "bad" IMO

 

[gls]

Roger Ebert is full of shit as usual. He's just another worthless icon of the dying corporate media complex.

 

[Liberty Star]

Sexual orientation of that Cohen idiot doesn't matter but question arises whe why did he not setup McCain, Lieberman or any of the neocon, pro Israeli occupation politicians?


Edit:
Ebirt is being an idiot. Did anyone ask Bruno Cohen if he found any term offensive? Since he has had some training in Israel or is partially Israeli, could he have seen it as a compliment actually considering the popularity of the discussed term among homsexual community in holy land that it seem to wear it as badge of honor?

http://www.jewishmosaic.org/torah/show_torah
http://www.queeruption.org/q2006/nologo.html

 

[Chester Copperpot]

Fuck you Roger Ebert... Lay off the fatty foods you planetarium fuck

 

[sparebulb]

If homos are proud of what they do/who they are, why are they so offended when the obvious is pointed out?

 

[Sandman33]

It's interesting to see people critical of behavior that they would probably also do in the same situation. I'm confused what the problem is if he said "That guy's a queer"? Isn't the Bruno character supposed to be queer?

Is it not nice to say queer? Should he have said, "That guy is gay"? "That guy is homosexual"? "That guy is a male who has sex with males?" That last one legitimately seems to be the popular push in college classes nowadays, actually.

I was in a microbiology class where a guy said the term "homosexual" is offensive, and that "gay" was more preferred. I would have thought it'd be the other way around. Hard to keep the lingo straight when you're being groped by one, I'd imagine.

He should have said "IS THAT GUY A BUTTFUCKING BROWNIE POUNDING ASSGOBBLER?" Kidding of course but this is just stupid.

Really though...this P.C. bullshit is WAY out of hand. The gay show is called QUEER Eye for the Straight Guy right? But now the world queer is offensive?

Well dig the sand out of your manginas and deal with it.

 

[paulaholic]

I sent the following e-mail to Roger:

Dear Mr. Ebert,

As an aspiring movie critic, I have long regarded you as one of my heroes. As a libertarian, I feel the same way about Congressman Ron Paul. Naturally, I was thrilled to see one of you acknowledge the other in your "Bruno" review. But as you may suspect, I took issue with the way in which you characterized him.

Ron Paul has held steadfast to the position that marriage should not be interfered with by the state, and supports any free association between two people. He has also been quoted as saying, "we don’t get our rights because we’re gays or women or minorities. We get our rights from our creator as individuals. So every individual should be treated the same way." Although his personal opinion of homosexuality may differ from his political opinion, it is inaccurate to label his statements "intolerant". His position, which is to allow all people equal rights and equal treatment, regardless of how he may about their lifestyles, is the very definition of tolerance.

Thank you for your time. I hope I have helped to clear up this issue. I have really been enjoying your movie reviews; the opportunity to read your work has instilled in me a greater appreciation of both film and writing. I look forward to reading more great reviews throughout the summer movie season!

And please, stop with the immature comments about him. He's not some kind of status-quo-perpetuating political stooge. He reviews movies. And that's all.

 

[jmdrake]

Roger Ebert, you suck. You want to hear so called "intolerant" language towards gays? Read the statements from the Obama administration comparing homosexuality to incest.

http://www.americablog.com/2009/06/obama-justice-department-defends-doma.html

All Paul has said on the issue is that marriage should be left up to the states and that gay marriage should not be imposed by congress, federal judges or state judges. He introduced legislation to keep federal judges from hearing the issue and said that if he were a state legislature he would try to keep state judges from imposing gay marriage against the will of the people. He doesn't have to invoke specter of incest to get his point across. He just invokes the constitution.

So why would Ebert attack Paul like this? Because he doesn't pander to the gay community. He's not running around saying repeal the DOMA. (He actually supports it). He's also not pushing for this evil "hate crimes" bill that so many on the left (including radical gay groups) want. That bill, if passed, will curtail EVERYBODY'S speech. (Well I'm sure losers like Ebert will be able to continue.)

Really, anyone stupid enough not to vote for Dr. Paul based on his reaction to that sick and disgusting stunt deserves whatever hellish government they end up getting.

Regards,

John M. Drake

 

[SovereignMN]

Queer is not an offensive term. Get over yourself Ebert.

 

[James Madison]

Sexual orientation of that Cohen idiot doesn't matter but question arises whe why did he not setup McCain, Lieberman or any of the neocon, pro Israeli occupation politicians?

I've always wondered this. Why would you want to make fun of a kind, honest man like Ron Paul when there are so many low-life neocons to mock?

 

[mstrmac1]

It is no doubt unfair of Cohen to victimize a perfectly nice man like Ron Paul. Watching Paul politely trying to deal with this weirdo made me reflect that as a fringe candidate, he has probably been subjected to a lot of strange questions on strange TV shows and probably is prepared to sit through almost anything for TV exposure. However, he has made a lot of intolerant comments about homosexuals, so by shouting “queer!” as he stalks out along a hotel corridor, he lost his chance of making amends. Helpful rule: If you find you have been the subject of a TV ambush, the camera is probably still rolling.

As a amateur movie critic, Roger Ebert is one of my heroes, as is Ron Paul, of course. Hearing one of them acknowledge the other was pretty cool.

What ignorant comments has Ron made about homosexuals? Roger is a liberal and probably assumes this of Paul solely because of the (R) next to his name.

That being said, if Ron really did say "queer" after the interview, that was a very stupid thing to do.

The guy was acting like a Queer...whats wrong with saying "Queer"?

 

[HRD53]

Wow a gay man (or one purporting to be gay) forcibly came on to him and then he had the audacity to call him a 'queer'?? Should he have just exclaimed 'Oh you terrible, terrible man!' and then ran down the hall with his hands on his bottom?

 

[jkr]

FUCK Roger Ebert !​

 

[Liberty Star]

I've always wondered this. Why would you want to make fun of a kind, honest man like Ron Paul when there are so many low-life neocons to mock?

Probably for same reasons Israeli lobby tools in media went after RP right after debates.

Every one now knows RP does not support elective wars and foreign interventions for other countries, US financial and military aid to Israel, dumb fiscal policies , increasing debt etc.