They might give him a supporting actor nomination like they gave Jonah Hill for "moneyball". On the basis of "it's a funny guy in a serious role" & that's it

Yea but Jonah can actually act. Louis looks like a guy they pulled off the street.

Did Jonah really act in Moneyball? He mostly just didn't act. Just sat still and stared. Half of Louie is just Louis sitting around staring. it's the Eminem 8 Mile school of acting: sit still and stare & people will think you did a good acting job.

Something about the struggle of Jewish Marxists in Hollywood. Wonder if it will do well.

I'm usually weirded out by this and the TACS sub's obsession with the baleful influence of leftist Jewry, but in this case, that's 100% what it's about.

I doubt Ant's on a "blacklist". I imagine he's just not on Louis's radar anymore. He was already down to an appearance per year at the end of O&A.

Louis is an awful actor. Just awful

He just needs some avant-garde jazz and a black and white filter to shine. Tighten your scarf.

Seriously, on Louis he has basically two mode. Confused, biting lip while rolling his eyes around. And confused while also appearing astonished.

Putting Anthony on the blacklist would imply that Louie even still thinks about Anthony, let alone realizing that he still does a show. Anthony is about as important now as one of those kids who comments on video games as they play them.

[deleted]

This does not look like an oscar contender you quay.

You mean niglisted?

Louis' delivery is terrible.

I really can't stand how revisionist history is becoming mainstream. Not to defend McCarthyism but it was in a time when a totalitarian government was attempting to take over the world through spies and communist plants.

To quote Hank Hill, "It was a time when we didn't know the Russians were incompetent".

it was in a time when a totalitarian government was attempting to take over the world through spies and communist plants.

Holy fuck are you wrong.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wPo0mk5bMqY

The cloud of autism in this subreddit is unending.

"Taking over the world through spies and communist plants" is a bit dramatic, sure, but the Soviet threat wasn't just imagined in Curtis LeMay's fever dreams. The declassification of the Venona Project shows that Soviet intelligence had its claws pretty deep in the 1940s (it's no wonder, considering that the NKVD was probably the most effective intelligence service in world history).

McCarthyism was wrong because it scapegoated many innocent political leftists and created a general atmosphere of mistrust and fear that is poisonous to a civil society. But the principal concerns that motivated McCarthyism were legitimate.

But the principal concerns that motivated McCarthyism were legitimate.

Right here is where your comment fell apart.

Go on.

That has nothing to do with anything lol. If you try to claim it wasn't a war of ideologies you're just wrong. It just so happens that socialists and the entire left were lumped together with the revolutionary communists.

Go listen to Dan Carlins Hardcore History episode on the Red Scares. It really is amazing. J. Edgar Hoover was a paranoid nutjob but most criticisms of McCarthyism are due to the luxury of knowing that Russia did not invade the US. Back then they had no idea what would happen. Cut the people some fucking slack.

You attempt to justify the situation with a poor excuse. You're touting the propaganda and fear mongering, completely non-ironically.

Also, I fail to see how the US being slightly less totalitarian completely absolves all responsibility.

Cut the people some fucking slack.

Brilliant.

I'm touting now am I? Apparently attempting to understand and empathize with something means I support it. It's not justifying, it's not vilifying them when you have no fucking clue what was going through their heads.

"Slightly less totalitarian".... You are a fucking moron. The US was only "slightly" worse than a nation which shot tens of thousands of people in the back of the head for treason? That established gulags and concentration camps in Siberia for political enemies to be worked to death?

Apparently attempting to understand and empathize with something means I support it

I believe 'apologist' could be an applicable term ...

It's not justifying, it's not vilifying them when you have no fucking clue what was going through their heads.

This is a laughably weak argument

The US was only "slightly" worse than a nation which shot tens of thousands of people in the back of the head for treason? That established gulags and concentration camps in Siberia for political enemies to be worked to death?

Would you consider the US of that era to be a free and open society? lol

Sending people to prison for anti-capitalist beliefs is one of the hallmarks of such a society? McCarthyism is as American as apple pie, right?

Believe it or not there is a significant amount of blood on the hands of the US. Crazy, huh?

No, the US is not on par with USSR, but you wouldn't call Jeffery Dahmer a nice guy just because John Wayne Gacy existed. That's a shit analogy, but this is a shit conversation so I'm sticking with it.

Side note, maybe I'm dull, but you're not equating American communists with the Russian government of the era? Are you?

I assume you believe that the Japanese internment made the U.S. no better than Nazi Germany and that the U.S. therefore had no right to fight in World War II.

no

that's not what I believe at all

Why not?

I'm not 100% educated on this matter, but I believe that the US was justified in fighting WW2. Not to say that everything the US did during the war was justified (mainly hiroshima and nagasaki as well as a slew of other crimes).

Japanese interment in the US was neither justified or right. It does not put the US on par with Nazi Germany for obvious reasons, mainly the fact there were no gas showers.

I can't believe I have to type this out.

So, what is it that makes it okay for the U.S. to fight Hitler, but not okay for the U.S. to fight Stalin?

It was okay for the US to fight Japan. The main justification being Pearl Harbor.

What about Germany?

The argument for war is easier to make in the case of Japan. The US would never go to war to stop fascism, mind you, regardless of whether that is the outcome (which it rarely is).

Was the U.S. going to war with Nazi Germany justified?

Fighting fascism is justifiable. That's the best answer I can give you, as I don't know enough to say 'yes' or 'no'.

Why is it justified to fight fascism, but not Stalinism?

Do you believe US foreign policy (western foreign policy in general) is constructed around the idea of spreading freedom and democracy?

You've already stated that it was just for the U.S. to fight fascism regardless of whether it was doing so for moral reasons, so this is irrelevant.

You've already stated that it was just for the U.S. to fight fascism regardless of whether it was doing so for moral reasons

Misrepresenting my point ...

What are you trying to imply here? You seem to have forgotten where this thread began ...

Perhaps I was wrong, but I assumed you went on this tangent to argue that the morality of fighting Stalinism is irrelevant since the U.S. wouldn't be fighting it for moral reasons anyway. My response was to point out that you did not apply that standard to the U.S. fighting fascism.

My response was to point out that you did not apply that standard to the U.S. fighting fascism.

But I do/did ....

I should point out that I said 'fighting fascism is justifiable'. You took that and really ran with it there ....

So, are you now arguing that it was not justified for the U.S. to fight Nazi Germany?

Did we not go over this already?

Fighting fascism is justifiable. That's the best answer I can give you, as I don't know enough to say 'yes' or 'no'.

Perhaps you are misinterpreting this?

It will not help to repeat the statement which I'm allegedly misinterpreting.

Would you consider the US of that era to be a free and open society? lol

They had a reason for their censorship, to stop the red tide.

Believe it or not there is a significant amount of blood on the hands of the US. Crazy, huh?

As there is for every country. Your point being? The difference is the US became totalitarian trying to fight against it. That is completely different than Stalin. Or do you not think motives and context matters?

No, the US is not on par with USSR, but you wouldn't call Jeffery Dahmer a nice guy just because John Wayne Gacy existed. That's a shit analogy, but this is a shit conversation so I'm sticking with it.

So a nation whose totalitarian leader is set on world domination, primarily through ideological conversion, are on the same level as the United States? Next you'll be saying the US is 'on the same level' of serial killer evilness as Germany because they happened to both commit war crimes. It's a retarded comparison because you are projecting entirely modern day optimistic ideals on what a country should be, rather than looking at it relatively. It's like people who say Lincoln was a racist when he was very progressive for the time, they are not viewing him in the context of his time. But I'm sure that won't sink in at all.

Side note, maybe I'm dull, but you're not equating American communists with the Russian government of the era? Are you?

You only know the two are different from each other because there is information in 2015 which separates the two. Why in the ever loving fuck do you assume people in 1950 know the things you know?

The difference is the US became totalitarian trying to fight against it. That is completely different than Stalin. Or do you not think motives and context matters?

Ehhhh, you're starting to lose me here. It can be reasonably argued that the Bolsheviks had very real reasons to fear counterrevolutionary elements as well.

The critical difference isn't that the U.S. had a good reason to be afraid and the Soviets didn't (they did). It's that, in the U.S., being branded a communist resulted in social ostracism, loss of employment, and maaaaybe imprisonment if the Senate hearing could nail you with contempt of court. In the Soviet Union, being branded a counterrevolutionary usually meant you disappeared.

[deleted]

It can be reasonably argued that the Bolsheviks had very real reasons to fear counterrevolutionary elements as well.

The critical difference isn't that the U.S. had a good reason to be afraid and the Soviets didn't (they did).

my mistake

Ehhhh, you're starting to lose me here. It can be reasonably argued that the Bolsheviks had very real reasons to fear counterrevolutionary elements as well.

Except the motives for making the counterrevolutionaries disappear were simply to preserve Stalin's power. The Soviets had a real reason to fear the US and other foreign powers because of the network of paranoia Stalin set up. Tensions from the post-deStalinization period were a result of this.

Of course people are defending McCarthy in this retarded fucking subreddit. Thank god you fucks never leave your basements.

They're not. At least I'm not. McCarthy was a self-interested shithead who ironically turned thousands of Americans into little Pavlik Morozovs.

The point I'm making is that, in rejecting McCarthyism, one need not also believe that the threat of Soviet subversion was entirely smoke and mirrors. The Soviets had a natural interest in infiltrating American institutions and eroding public trust, and we were eager to do the same to them (though in the wake of Stalin and Beria, they didn't have much public trust to begin with).

For as wrongheaded and frankly Bolshevik-esque as McCarthyism was, it doesn't retroactively make Soviet spies and sympathizers a myth.

Except NOBODY was saying anything about Stalin, the USSR or Bolshevikism, just what a fucking traitor McCarthy was. What a deeply un-American, cowardly, fascist fuck he was. You don't have to say anything other than that. It is completely unnecessary and beside the point to even bring the USSR into it. The Soviets were FAMOUSLY terrible at infiltrating the US populus, US institutions, US politics. They were unable to do so. They barely even tried. Joe McCarthy literally made shit up and sold it to the American people to keep them in line and terrorized. We are not talking about Soviet spies. Duh--yes they were good. Did they infiltrate the US political system. NO, at no point did they ever even come close and you know it.

So basically you're saying that the Cold War never happened and McCarthy just made it up to oppress the left?

He didn't make up the Cold War, but he did use fake evidence as a way to accuse people of communism. "I have in my hand a letter..."

It is completely unnecessary and beside the point to even bring the USSR into it.

That's more or less what I'm trying to do. You and Gab91 both seem to be tying the evil of McCarthyism to the nonexistence of Soviet infiltration. In reality, the shittiness of McCarthyism does not hinge upon the existence or non-existence of Soviet subversive elements. If they didn't exist, then McCarthyism was a purely imaginary witch hunt. If they did exist, McCarthyism was still a partisan weapon to defame political opponents and actually damaged the liberal-conservative anti-communist consensus.

It was wrong-headed and counter-productive either way. There's no need to deny the existence of Soviet spies and sympathizers (whose existence declassified documents now prove) to condemn McCarthyism. It was fundamentally wrong regardless.

What's odd is these are the same people who loathe the kind of neo-McCarthyism coming from the other side of the aisle. They are intensely hypocritical and indeed fucking faggots.

If you believe in McCarthyism, but only for ideas you disagree with, please head back to the cumia show subreddit, you goatee-having cuckfederates.

Until I came to this sub, I honestly didn't think people like this existed. Or at least I didn't think they were this depressingly common. They are absolutely everything they hate. Freud could've written a book on these clowns. So uneducated, so incurious, so aggressively stupid and hypocritical and proud of it. They are the reason why Trump is running for president and leading. The worst, the most venal, unintelligent and underhanded of the entire electorate. And here they are defending Tailgunner Joe. It makes sense in a perverted way. These men are America's unfettered id running mad.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Doublethink

You are no more intelligent than the other people who post here. You also just described how they see you, but you haven't grasped that either.

Not one comment posted here has defended McCarthy. They've only asserted that Stalinism was bad and many of them denounced McCarthy while doing so.

Remember that you came from me, I'm the only reason that you ever came to be. Nigger kike faggot.

The difference is the US became totalitarian trying to fight against it. That is completely different than Stalin. Or do you not think motives and context matters?

Ehhhh, you're starting to lose me here. It can be reasonably argued that the Bolsheviks had very real reasons to fear counterrevolutionary elements as well.

The critical difference isn't that the U.S. had a good reason to be afraid and the Soviets didn't (they did). It's that, in the U.S., being branded a communist resulted in social ostracism, loss of employment, and maaaaybe imprisonment if the Senate hearing could nail you with contempt of court. In the Soviet Union, being branded a counterrevolutionary usually meant you disappeared.

Except NOBODY was saying anything about Stalin, the USSR or Bolshevikism, just what a fucking traitor McCarthy was. What a deeply un-American, cowardly, fascist fuck he was. You don't have to say anything other than that. It is completely unnecessary and beside the point to even bring the USSR into it. The Soviets were FAMOUSLY terrible at infiltrating the US populus, US institutions, US politics. They were unable to do so. They barely even tried. Joe McCarthy literally made shit up and sold it to the American people to keep them in line and terrorized. We are not talking about Soviet spies. Duh--yes they were good. Did they infiltrate the US political system. NO, at no point did they ever even come close and you know it.

my mistake