W, Oliver Stone’s contentious drama about George W Bush, will launch in US cinemas before the presidential election.
Distributor Lionsgate announced that it will release the film on October 17, three weekends before American voters go to the polls on November 4.
The film has already drawn fire from Republican supporters after a copy of the screenplay was leaked to the press. The script revealed how Stone plans to portray Bush as a churlish, foul-mouthed recovering alcoholic who is deeply resentful of his father, the former President George Bush.
Just another Oil Patch Boy trying to do his bit for God, Country and the fulfillment of biblical prophecy.
No, Steverino, if you checked out the URL, you would see where it came from. You’ve heard of Google, right? Try googling “oil company profits”. You’ll come up with almost 7,000,000 hits, all of them with astounding numbers.
>>Why don’t you do a little research into how
>>much the big evil oil companies actually make
>>after pumping the profits back into R&D.
The profits listed are AFTER having been “pumped back into R&D”, Einstein.
>>By the way, capital gains on the stock
>>ownership directly relates to how much a
>>company makes.
Uh, I guess you don’t own any stock, eh Stevie? The two are often correlated, but there’s certainly no “direct” “relationship”. In any case, we’re not talking about teachers’ union pension funds making money off of buying and selling oil company stock, we’re talking about the record-smashing profits that oil companies themselves make (net profit, mind you, after R&D). You know, the money that goes into the pockets of President Cheney’s Secret Energy Cabal??
#33 MM – Almost 7,000,000 hits and I’m sure you read every on of them before selecting the one that suited your argument.
As for some secret energy cabal you really need to adjust your tin-foil hat. I think it’s a little too tight tonight.
>>Almost 7,000,000 hits and I’m sure you
>>read every on of them
No, Wonder Boy, I just looked at the first couple of pages’ summaries. They ALL said the same thing. Record-smashing profits, government subsidies, blah blah
As to the tinfoil hat, I guess you don’t read the newspaper either. Cheney has fought two legal challenges that sought to force him to reveal the makeup of his Secret Energy Cabal. And he won both, thanks to the suck-ass “supreme” court that gave him the election in 2000.
“about 300 groups and individuals met with staff members of the energy task force, including a handful who saw Cheney himself, according to the list, which was compiled in the summer of 2001. For six years, those names have been a closely guarded secret, thanks to a fierce legal battle waged by the White House.”
http://tinyurl.com/3dgocm
The only bigger mystery in the White House is “wtf was that rectangular object Dumbya was wearing under his coat during the debates”!!
#35 MM – Wow! I’m impressed by your ability to argue a tin-foil hat point of view.
I am sure that no self respecting democratic administration would EVER think of using the law or a Supreme Court ruling on their side….
I want the oil companies to make money and if they have to do it crushing Polar Bears or putting up oil rigs in front of the Kennedy compound then so be it.
Ever look to see which house is mor energy efficient, Algore’s or President Bush’s? No, I thought not. Wait, I’m sure that it was Cheney who had a hand in it.
[insert Twilight Zone theme music hear]
I am sure the rectangular object under Bush’s jacket was a TFHDU (Tin Foil Hat Detection Unit) forced on him by Cheney and the Secret Service. OMG Secret Service initials are SS. Cheney is Hitler reincarnated eh?
Most times I enjoy a spirited debate but this one bores me. I would be surprised if anything came out of your posting except Bush bashing and I hate America bullshit.
You say the same thing over and over and over and over again.
>>I would be surprised if anything came out of
>>your posting except Bush bashing and I hate
>>America bullshit.
It’s OK son, you’re in denial. I’ve seen it before from the hapless fools who voted for President Cheney and his trained monkey.
>>I want the oil companies to make money and
>>if they have to do it crushing Polar Bears
Wow. To quote one of the illustrious posters here on dvorak dot org slash blog, you’re a sick fuck.
I don’t mind if the oil company lackeys make a decent living, but the obscene profits they’re reaping now while the blood money funnels into President Cheney’s pockets (and those of his Secret Energy Cabal) are just plain wrong. Wtf is wrong with you, boy? Are you Dick Cheney’s secret lovechild or something? Why are you so insistent that oil profiteering while Americans are unable to drive to work is such a good thing?
#38 MM – Nice try.
Until something better than oil comes along you had better get ready to crush baby seals, polar bears and Kennedy’s to get more of domestically. I’m not for lining the pockets of OPEC but our entire economy is based on cheap oil and the sooner we get away from it the better. I don’t care if the big evil oil companies make 10 or 12 % profit margin. It’s still a whole lot less than our worthless government takes in taxes and I don’t know if you have driven on a road lately we aren’t getting shit for it.
You are starting to sound like a moveon.org lackey. Think for yourself man.
>>You are starting to sound like a
>>moveon.org lackey.
Better than than a fanboi for President Cheney and his poorly trained pet monkey.
Interesting in that all the time I have been posting here you overlook all the times I criticize the Bush administration. I guess reading isn’t a strong suit for you is it?
I just just don’t sound like a rabid parrot saying the same thing over and over again doing it.
>>you overlook all the times I criticize
>>the Bush administration
Haven’t noticed that among your right-wing ranting, Stever. However, you did vote for him. Hence, you’re in denial.
You got smacked down on the “Cheney’s Secret Oil Cabal” thing, and now your stinging resentment is coming to the fore.
#43 pedro – Sorry, I don’t know what I was thinking.
So now democrats are AGAINST higher gas prices? It was only a week ago that you guys said that was the liberals’ energy plan.
Steve-O,
So what is your point? I see Mustard’s quite plainly. Your point however seems to be non-existent.
You so much prefer to spout your “Tin foil hat” scenario instead of actually making a point. If you have a point (other than the one under your hat) please make it. Mustard is shaming you.
Had Gore of Kerry gotten in, we’d all be dead or wish we were – so we’re still better off.
#45 – Democrats are against normal people having good lives. We’re all suppposed to suffer because there one person, somewhere who’s suffering, and that’s unfair.
>>Had Gore of Kerry gotten in, we’d all
>>be dead or wish we were
Unlikely. NOTHING could be more of a disgrace than Dumbya’s reign of idiocy. Now, being an American is something to be ashamed of, rather than proud. It will take generations to undo the damage done by the Chimperor-in-Chief.
>>We’re all suppposed to suffer because there
>>one person, somewhere who’s suffering, and
>>that’s unfair.
Naw, that’s the Republican platform. Why do you think we’re in Iraq? (other than to line the pockets of President Cheney’s secret energy cabal, of course).
>>Democrats are against normal people
>>having good lives.
Again. That’s a plank in the Republican platform. Most “normal people” are doing a fuck of a lot worse now than they were 8 years ago. Mission Accomplished!!
> NOTHING could be more
> of a disgrace than Dumbya’s
> reign of idiocy.
Uh huh. That’s what people said in 1976. “Nothing could be worse than Nixon or the Republicans.” Then we got Carter.
>>Then we got Carter.
Dumbya makes Jimmy Carter look like a combo of Winston Churchill and Einstein.
Generations it will take to repair the damage that ventriloquist’s dummy has done to America. Generations.
#51
Only in the minds of liberals is that true. Bush’s legacy will all come down to Iraq. If Iraq stabilizes, Bush’s Presidency will be seen as better than average. If it does not, it will be seen as worse than average.
>>Only in the minds of liberals
>>is that true.
I guess America is overwhelminly liberal then. Not even by a landslide; more like an avalanche. No one alive today has suffered under a “president” with lower approval ratings or higher disapproval ratings.
And if you think Iraq is going to “stabilize”, you’re dumber than I thought.
“Better than average” and “worse than average” are not the appropriate terms of comparison for Dumbya’s reign. It’s been (and will be seen for the remainder of recorded history) as a complete, utter, abject failure. A stupid, ignorant man, who got in over his head, and who was surrounded by evil, self-serving “advisors”.
DONT VOTE/I WIN
Brought to you by the association to have a duck for president. Daffy, Donald, Howard, Mallard or Dipsy.
And no one alive today has suffered under a “president” with higher approval ratings. Wait…
“The record holder for highest approval rating? President George W. Bush, who topped out at 90% in the immediate aftermath of 9/11. His father is the runner-up, with an 89% rating during the first Gulf War.”
http://ask.yahoo.com/20051011.html
Geez, Americans must have loved that war.
RBG
>>And no one alive today has suffered
>>under a “president” with higher
>>approval ratings.
That was in the immediate aftermath of 9/11, when the gullible Americans were laboring under the misconception that the realtively new “president” was going to track down and kill Osama, eliminate Islamic terrorism, and make things as good as they were during Clinton’s administration.
Man, were we fucking morons, or what? Look at the laughable piece of used toilet paper he turned out to be. As to Pappy, at least he had a few morals, a few ethics, and he wasn’t a gibbering imbecile. Unlike his chickenhawk son. Guess THAT apple fell far from the tree.
#53
> And if you think Iraq is going to
> “stabilize”, you’re
> dumber than I thought.
You have a habit of simply being dismissive in your arguments with little thought to the point of the discussion especially when it comes to Bush.
Let’s imagine, *hypothetically*, that Iraq does stand on its own as a democracy in the near future. In this hypothetical scenario, how do you think historians will rate someone that had the conviction to topple a dictator, maintain a presence against tremendous opposition and create a democracy where a totalitarian state stood previously?