MCN Blogs
Kim Voynar

By Kim Voynar Voynar@moviecitynews.com

Go Tinklenberg!

Awesome news coming from Minnesota Public Radio: The Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee has reportedly added El Tinklenberg to the list of candidates it will support from its Red to Blue Fund, which pours money into the coffers of Democratic candidates in races where there’s a good possibility of taking back a Republican-controlled seat.
The DCCC will, it seems, spend more than $1 million in television ads supporting Tinklenberg in his race against Michele “McCarthy” Bachmann. The ads start tomorrow. This could be just what the Tink needs to uproot Bachmann and put a Democrat in the seat for Minnesota’s Sixth Congressional District. One question … will the DCCC’s ads end with a “thank you” to Bachmann for handing them her own head on a silver platter? She keeps trying to backtrack and talk her way out of this, but that’s kind of hard to do when the video of you saying the very things you’re denying saying is out there to be seen by anyone and everyone.
It’s going to be a close race, but here’s hoping Tinklenberg pulls it off. This has just become one of the hottest races to watch on election night.
… and mucho thanks to Ray Pride for tipping me off about this.

Be Sociable, Share!

4 Responses to “Go Tinklenberg!”

  1. Deathtongue_Groupie says:

    This is on top of the $640K that came in within 48 hours of her appearance on Hardball.
    The RNC must be shitting bricks, she turned a cake walk re-election into a toss up with one Fascist remark.
    Way to go!

  2. Mgmax says:

    Oh great, another “movie” blog that’s all about liberal politics. Anyone know a movie blog that’s about movies?

  3. jeffmcm says:

    Mgmax, didn’t you read the first three letters after the www up above?

  4. swordandpen says:

    Mgmax, do you plan to do this martyr routine on every movie blog?

Politics

Quote Unquotesee all »

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