It shows how out of it I was in trying to be in it, acknowledging that I was out of it to myself, and then thinking, “Okay, how do I stop being out of it? Well, I get some legitimate illogical narrative ideas” — some novel, you know?
So I decided on three writers that I might be able to option their material and get some producer, or myself as producer, and then get some writer to do a screenplay on it, and maybe make a movie.
And so the three projects were “Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep,” “Naked Lunch” and a collection of Bukowski. Which, in 1975, forget it — I mean, that was nuts. Hollywood would not touch any of that, but I was looking for something commercial, and I thought that all of these things were coming.
There would be no Blade Runner if there was no Ray Bradbury. I couldn’t find Philip K. Dick. His agent didn’t even know where he was. And so I gave up.
I was walking down the street and I ran into Bradbury — he directed a play that I was going to do as an actor, so we know each other, but he yelled “hi” — and I’d forgot who he was.
So at my girlfriend Barbara Hershey’s urging — I was with her at that moment — she said, “Talk to him! That guy really wants to talk to you,” and I said “No, fuck him,” and keep walking.
But then I did, and then I realized who it was, and I thought, “Wait, he’s in that realm, maybe he knows Philip K. Dick.” I said, “You know a guy named—” “Yeah, sure — you want his phone number?”
My friend paid my rent for a year while I wrote, because it turned out we couldn’t get a writer. My friends kept on me about, well, if you can’t get a writer, then you write.”
~ Hampton Fancher
“That was the most disappointing thing to me in how this thing was played. Is that I’m on the phone with you now, after all that’s been said, and the fundamental distinction between what James is dealing with in these other cases is not actually brought to the fore. The fundamental difference is that James Franco didn’t seek to use his position to have sex with anyone. There’s not a case of that. He wasn’t using his position or status to try to solicit a sexual favor from anyone. If he had — if that were what the accusation involved — the show would not have gone on. We would have folded up shop and we would have not completed the show. Because then it would have been the same as Harvey Weinstein, or Les Moonves, or any of these cases that are fundamental to this new paradigm. Did you not notice that? Why did you not notice that? Is that not something notable to say, journalistically? Because nobody could find the voice to say it. I’m not just being rhetorical. Why is it that you and the other critics, none of you could find the voice to say, “You know, it’s not this, it’s that”? Because — let me go on and speak further to this. If you go back to the L.A. Times piece, that’s what it lacked. That’s what they were not able to deliver. The one example in the five that involved an issue of a sexual act was between James and a woman he was dating, who he was not working with. There was no professional dynamic in any capacity.
~ David Simon
David, your paranoia about the media makes you sound a lot more like Hillary than it does Obama. Who are you supporting again?
“This is all part of the game… get him talking about something damaging, pretty much irrelevant, and re-launched just a Clinton needed help…”
Progressives made Obama’s minister relevant every time they slagged on Bush and the Christian right. Progressives made Obama’s minister relevant every time they made a film like Jesus Camp to portray Republican Christians in the worst possible light. Progressives made Obama’s minister relevant every time they linked GW to the most extreme statement made by Pat Robertson and Jerry Falwell.
In short, Obama is in this situation because progressives have put him in this position. This is not Hillary’s fault.
One can’t point to Bush and the Christian right for 8 years and call them extreme and fascist and worse and then expect Obama to get a pass when his Rev says things far more extreme and worse.
Again, I do not think Obama is a bad guy. I really don’t…but he has been getting a ride many politicians do not. This is just par for the course.
No paranoia, Blackcloud. It just is what it is.
Hope is hope. And reality is reality.
Obama can clearly see how both work. And that’s why I support him… more and more… and the attacks get thicker and less subtle.
Yes Cloudy; Heat is not angry at Hillary. Nope. He’s happy at this situation as much as I am. Yup.
So, DP, tell me when Hillary is going to unleash the Weather Underground bomb on Obama. And while we’re at it, maybe IO can explain what Obama was doing hanging out with terrorists in the first place.
As an Obama supporter, I was rather concerned by how things have been going for the last couple of weeks. He has been on the defensive. But today he hit it out of the park.
Well, BC… look up the name Susan Rosenberg.
Let’s not even get to the fact that I have spent time with Bernardine Dohrn and I think she is funny and smart and in her post-50 years, hardly a mad bomber of any kind… even if I can’t begin to excuse the Weather Underground’s acts which led to deaths.
In case you don’t feel like looking it up – Susan Rosenberg was a member of the Weather Underground, and was sentenced to 58 years in jail in 1985. She was pardoned by Bill Clinton in 2001 and released from jail.
The Republicans will use BOTH connections to the Weather Underground against either Democratic nominee. However, one is real… and one is absurd. Obama’s “relationship” is a joke and should be tossed away when the reality of the situation, centered mostly on one meeting in 1995, is brought forward.
Of course, the extremists have no problem mixing lies and truth to sell as story, as this Wright piece from August 9, 2007 shows. Someone told me yesterday that he had heard that you could see Obama sitting behind Wright nodding his head in approval when Wright said the worst things he said… another lie. Obama wasn’t even in the same city.
You can find a ton of stories about Wright from last year.
The scary part is that Hilary Clinton’s campaign and the Insane Right – not the entire right… the liars and spinners and fear mongers who get so much attention, which many on the left are far too scared of – are in perfect synch over their mutual enemy.
Dave, I’m not arguing for or against the substance of the charges. I am arguing against your perception that Hillary and her minions are somehow controlling media coverage of Obama and coordinating these “radical eruptions,” to paraphrase Bill’s “bimbo eruptions.” It’s no more credible than the vast right-wing conspiracy. The idea that everyone is in cahoots to bring Obama down is preposterous. Does Hillary want to do in Obama, without looking like she is? Of course. Does the media want to do him in? Of course not, that would ruin the best story they have, i.e., the horse race. It’s a long time from now to August. That’s a big inforation void to fill. The media likes a story. They are, as someone described on Olberman, like little kids playing soccer: they all chase the ball, gather around it, and when it pops out of the scrum they go chase it again, all over the field. You might be right that base motives are involved, but I’d say it’s not the one you think. The “Insane Right” is keeping its powder dry because its members aren’t sure if they want to use it against McCain yet or for him.
I know who Susan Rosenberg is. I agree that the Republicans will go after both HC and BO for their Weather Underground connections. But you’ll have to agree with me that sooner or later Obama is going to have to go through this same ritual penance regarding his link with Dohrn and Ayers. That’s the problem he has, that he will keep having to apologize for and explain his associations from his Hyde Park days, as the article from Salon on my name makes clear. And Salon is a very lefty website. So even the left is worried. I think Obama should attack HRC over her and Bill’s cronies. But everyone expects them to be corrupt and venal. Not him. Hence the danger that anything that dents his aura as above it all can be an Achilles Heel. Let’s just hope he’s been using the internet for more constructive purposes than getting some. Although that doesn’t seem to have been an obstacle for David Paterson.
Nicol, your subtext is showing.
That Salon article.
http://www.salon.com/opinion/feature/2008/03/18/hyde_park/
Well, I read the Salon article and I’m terrified.
I cannot believe that this man has gotten so close to the highest office in America.
Let’s imagine, because it’s not so far-fetched, that there is someone who hates the United States, and he becomes President. What kind of policies could we expect?
Suppose we imagine that, like his wife, he was never proud of America until his political carrer took off.
Suppose we assume that he agrees with his pastor of over twenty years. ‘the Rev. Jeremiah Wright, was shown on ABC News changing the words of “God Bless America” to “Goddamn America.”‘
“Wright has been caught saying stuff that some black folks say when white folks aren’t listening. . .he thundered that the U.S. government cooked up HIV as a form of inner-city genocide, or that America brought 9/11 on itself.”
So, if America is attacked, whose fault is it? How would such a man respond to an attack?
“I don’t regret setting bombs. I feel we didn’t do enough.” –Bill Ayers.
So, now we find out he has friends who have supported the overthrow of the government. “Obama later served with Ayers on the board of the Woods Fund.”
This goes way beyond being disappointed with America. I am agahst with the damage that this man could do if given the reins of power, and I don’t know how anyone could continue to support him.
You all do know that the Republicans are going to chew Obama up and spit him out, right? All this talk of reaching across aisles and bringing people together is very lovely until you get to work. The Republicans will never, ever, ever bend to the will of a Democratic led White House or Congress. They will disrupt, undermine and do everything they can to bring him down. It is the Republican party that needs to be destroyed, not Hillary Clinton and all the hoping and uplift in the world isn’t going to change the reality of it. There’s been a lot of talk about Hillary making friends with Republican Senators during her time in office and I say, good on ‘ya. Bring your enemies close and then, when you’re President, kill them (not literally). She has the balls to do it. But what do I know, I’m just a Canadian.
Jeff,
What subtext would that be?
R Scott R is back to share his daily dose of crazy. Are you honestly suggesting that Obama hates America? How can someone even attempt to reason with a person who truly believes that? He hates American about as much as McCain does.
Nicol, let’s not get carried away. I don’t think Wright’s comments are far worse than some of the crazy shit the Christian right has said over the years. As bad, fine, but far worse? No way.
Yes, Hillary Clinton. The Republican Killer. Because Democrats won SO many seats under her husband’s tenure.
Ugh.
The SuperDelegates need only look at IL-14 to see why Obama is the one to endorse, and I wouldn’t be surprised to see John Edwards do as such Thursday Night on the Tonight Show.
Stella,
Let the voters decide. All I am saying is the link is relevant. It is not underhanded nor is it just dirty politics. If a man wants to run as a uniter you can’t have a wing nut hater like this Rev as your confidant.
Progressives said the same of Bush.
Nicol, I just do not believe that the Wright issue suddenly makes Obama unfit to be president.
Stella,
Of course not. But it is relevant. It opens questions if this man’s views have affected Obama or his wife. Nothing more. Nothing less.
To many on the left, Bush’s version of Christianity made him unfit for office. People wondered where he got his inspiration from. Commentators and filmmakers alike said it made him, stupid, simple, evil or a buffoon. Even Tony Blair said he had to keep his faith under wraps lest he be called a “nutter” by the left.
All I am saying is…it’s a relevant thing to talk about because the left made it relevant about Bush and Blair. That’s all.
The voters can decide.
My problem with Bush’s faith was not his religious beliefs but his faith-based policies.
Speaking of Bush’s faith:
http://www.slate.com/id/2186343/entry/2186344/
Stella,
But you prove my point again. Obama has said his views on everything from immigration to the environment to sexuality is rooted in his faith.
That’s his option. I am not here to say if he is right or wrong. But Obama has framed himself in Christianity every bit as much as Bush. All I am saying is it is relevant and the people can decide.
Nicol, I said it is not the faith that bothers me. That is true of Bush and Obama. I do not care for Bush’s faith-based policies. That is not the same as objecting to his faith in general.
Nicol, the difference is that Bush’s actions have demonstrated him to be callous, arrogant, and generally incompetent for the job. He could have had the Dalai Lama as his spiritual advisor and it wouldn’t have mattered. Obama’s actual deeds and words don’t demonstrate this same pattern of behavior. Pretty simple.
Jeff, I would disagree with you that Bush is callous.
By the way, I would say that describing him as irresponsible is far more damning than calling him incompetent or arrogant.
how about calling him a bumbling fool? an ignorant cowboy? a befuddled buffoon? a stammering stooge? these all come so easily to mind…
My favorite is Dry Drunk.
that’s a new one on me, tee hee. maybe he killed one too many brain cells on a 3-day booze ‘n blow bender… might actually explain a lot
Jeff,
Yes, I agree. Your analysis was pretty simple.
Again, what subtext were you talking about earlier. I would love to know?
This is off-topic, but you can bet that McCain sure is glad to have Joe Lieberman around. I think John’s age is beginning to show itself.
http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2008/03/20/787720.aspx
Nicol, I don’t think there’s any point in telling you what you, in the back of your head, already know.
Might be dirty tricks against Obama regarding his passport according to Drudge.
Karl Rove again?
Probably not. Seems all three candidates had their files breached. Seems like a case of that disease that is fatal for felines.
Yeah I was just kidding. Strange story though.
Too late to really matter, but just how hard is it to keep South and North Carolina apart in minds out there? I could understand the Dakotas (South has Rushmore & Sturgis, North pretty much doesn’t).
This native son bristles every time it happens…
Having lived in that universe on the south side for years of my life, I am amused by the absurdity of the Salon article.
I have at least one family member who has been lost, on some level, to the diversity of the neightborhood, not quite able to navigate the complexity of race and politics. But I can’t think of a better incubator since Berkeley of decades ago – really, better than that, as Chicago is more diverse than SF – for a great political mind.
Ideas must be tested by fire, not an easy nod.
The absurdity of a charge, you will admit Dave, has nothing to do with its efficacy. Otherwise, the rubbish notion that Obama stopped wearing a flag pin because he hates America (or vice-versa) would not get any traction at all. We could compile examples ad infinitum.
There are two groups selling this rubbish. First, the Republicans. But they are in a bubble. None of the serious righties are voting for Obama or Clinton, period. Moderates will not only see through it, but come to understand that it is an advantage.
The second group is extreme Clinton advocates, who see Obama as a threat to her ascendence.
You make a good point in that like Kerry, attacks only work when people are predisposed to believe them. I don’t think that only racists are anxious to see the South Side as “where Farrakhan lives,” but anyone who is remotely open minded will be able to see the U of C for all it is and not just for any one side.
But remember… Obama has been under attack by Clinton and the right wing that desperately wants to race against Clinton for a full month now… and he is still standing strong. No one can go unaffected by the endless television and other media coverage focusing so narrowy on one negative. And Clinton has still never gotten more than 7 points ahead of Obama in the polls of Dems. And right now, they are even again… though he is ahead again in one poll.
I will be posting an anti-Hillary effort by the right later today. Imagine what would happen if this kind of relentless attack happened to her for a month. Imagine what something like endorsements by Nancy Pelosi and John Edwards could do.
Frankly, I think Obama going through this Wright crap made him stronger and now suggests that he is already the winner of the nomination. These attacks are about as severe as will come… and from both sides.