Saturday, May 10, 2008

More Cartoons

Look at the funny fat man squirm. 

Strombo tries to get a straight answer out of a crooked man.

5 comments:

LuLu said...

Grossly offensive, grossly offensive, grossly offensive

It's amazing how that smug, corpulent, God-bothering fucker can't come up with anything else when he's called on his censoring bullshit, isn't it?

Aunty Bertha said...

Me thinks he dost protest too much...

The nasty fat man appeared offended that anyone could think that he could have been the one to leak the story to the G & M. I wouldn't be surprised if he had something to do with it. I suspect that he thought that the majority of Canadians would be all for it and his ego wanted to prove it.

Also interesting that he didn't deny being the force behind the bill.

What does this remind me of...?

Oh yeah, the early 1930's when the Catholic League decided they didn't like what was coming out of Hollywood.

While decyphering subtext from a Production Code era movie can be fun, I don't want my children to develop a skill for it out of necessity.

I liked that "oh shit" moment near the end when Strombo called him on the Church's tax breaks.

GAB

Heathen Mike said...

George is a good interviewer - he's like Jon Stewart in that he calls people on their bullshit but still shakes their hand and gets them to come back for more.

Agreed, GAB, I loved the "church tax break" bit at the end.

Red Tory said...

Good comparison. Strombo is very disarming and that that jocular approach to interviewing can sometimes be very effective at revealing hidden truths that frequently go missing in more "serious" interviews.

Mike said...

I find tax breaks for religious organizations and churches grossly offensive. I don't want my tax dollars funding religion, especially ones like the Catholic Church that have a history of sexually abusing children. I think, therefore, that the Minister should be able to withdrawal tax exempt status of a church or religious organization they find "grossly offensive".

You think Chuckles McVety would go for that amendment to C-10? Because that is the EXACT same logic he is using.

Give tax breaks to all films that meet a certain economic standard, or give no tax breaks to the film industry at all. Anything else is de facto censorship based on content, as well as an act of prior restraint.

Anyone who says otherwise is a liar and a charlatan.