June 13, 2017
"What is wrong with detente with Russia? Why would you be against it? I don't understand this mentality of — maybe it's because you hate Trump, I perhaps can understand... so therefore Russia is convenient as an excuse for hacking the election."
Says Oliver Stone as Stephen Colbert aggressively pushes him to impugn Vladimir Putin and the audience begins to laugh at Stone. It's very interesting how this interview spirals down. If you lack the patience to watch the whole thing, you could start at 5:25. Stone spent 2 years working on a documentary about Putin, including something like 20 hours with Putin, and has what seems to be a carefully constructed 4-hour documentary, which is playing on Showtime this week. I'm part way through the first hour, and it seems detailed, serious, and engrossing.
Stone expresses respect for Putin, for all he's been through over the last 16 years, and obviously, Stone has his point of view, but I don't know why Colbert doesn't show respect to Stone for all the work he's done on this project and for the extraordinary access to Putin he obtained. Or actually, I suspect that I do know. I think Colbert feels desperately threatened by Stone's normalization of Putin, since so much of the anti-Trump agenda is premised on the foundation that Russia is the enemy and Putin is evil.
"What is wrong with detente with Russia? Why would you be against it? I don't understand this mentality of — maybe it's because you hate Trump, I perhaps can understand... so therefore Russia is convenient as an excuse for hacking the election."
Notice how Stone initially says "hunt" for "hate" — "maybe it's because you hunt... Trump." That could be a mere skipping forward to the the "uh" sound that's coming up in Trump, but it seems too meaningful. Colbert and the people he represents — the mocking laughers in the audience — really are hunting Trump.
I don't know where Stone stands here. He may simply be pro-Russia. I was surprised at about 4:00, when he's talking about Putin reaching out to have a relationship with the United States, that he twice refers to the United States as "them," rather than "us," which is, I think, what a person with a strong bond to the United States would say. But Stone may be an artist (or a documentarian) who sees himself as neutral and apart, and Stone may be just a very strange guy. He does seem rather strange in this interview. He walks out as if he's confused about what this place is that he's wandered out into.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
77 comments:
What a great post. This is why I keep clicking on this blog.
I'm no great fan of Oliver Stone, although I liked Platoon and Wall Street.
I'm surely no great fan of Putin; one of the great international thugs of our time. (Even Bill O'Reilly -- and I am no fan of Bill O'Reilly -- said it to Trump: "But Putin's a thug!")
And I am less and less a fan of Stephen Colbert, whose lefty schtick really ought to be confined to a comedy channel on cable.
I am an unabashed fan of Althouse.
I don't know where Stone stands here. He may simply be pro-Russia.
Prior to November 2016...most Democrats and Lefties were...which is why I have asked several times for someone to tell me exactly when Russia became the bad guys to the Left. The Left defended and supported Russia for the 99 years prior. Stone's documentary would have been seen as normal.
Poor Stone started working on this documentary before Putin and Russia became the great evil. Back when a reset with Russia was desirable.
Before the 80's called and wanted their foreign policy back.
Stone's a prog, always has been. It's not hard to tell where he stands. Didn't he support Chavez?
I certainly see Russia as a rival, and an enemy of freedom in general. ( Romney 1, Obama+Crowley 0 )
I assume that, as reported, they were involve in hacking and releasing DNC and Clinton campaign info. I assume that, as reported, they hacked or tried to hack a variety of election-related computers.
What makes that news? I assume they try, and sometimes succeed, at hacking computer systems at all levels of our government, various infrastructure/utilities, and any significant size company. I assume we do the same to them.
So why is any of this newsworthy, other than to try to cover up the Democrat's embarrassment?
Well, I see Stone as a flake with bad judgment, but he does seem to be serious in a way that gay-basher Colbert does not. Colbert wants to treat *mention* of Putin as a dispositive argument and a signal of mocking laughter. That's how he operates. His gay-bashing smear of Trump only works that way. And he does hate Trump; he's lying.
The democrat media party and the GOPe screaming about Russia is really wrong headed.
The "them" at 4:00 possibly means the White House administration, or maybe he means US, but from Russia's POV.
The Russian Federation is not the Soviet Union.
They see dangerous enemies all around them - not that the Russians have not worked for centuries to make those enemies - and could well use having the U.S. as a friend or at least not overtly hostile.
Of course Putin is a thug, that's the kind of person the old KGB created. The thing is, he was a thug when Hillary was giving him a reset button and he was a thug when he out played the "Light Bringer" in Syria. He only became an evil monster when the left could use him as an excuse why Hillary couldn't beat an orange haired ass clown even with all the money and media behind her.
Or actually, I suspect that I do know.
Apparently Stone didn't get any footage of Putin holstering his cock, which would have vindicated Colbert. 20 hours together and no indication Trump was constantly interrupting their taping to find out what Putin wanted him to do?
Yeah, that's gotta be a disappointment.
"he twice refers to the United States as "them," rather than "us," which is, I think, what a person with a strong bond to the United States would say" Now that's funny. Stone is as anti-American as they come, this side of Noam Chomsky.
But, based on the post's account, he does seem clueless. Prog humor is entirely situational, so here the joke is on him, thinking that he could say something nice about Putin. That's so 2012.
I'm not an Oliver Stone fan. Haven't seen skme of his most famous films. Wall street. JFK. Dislike Platoon. Doors was not good. Like Talk Radio and People Versus Larry Flynt.
Everyone oohed and aahed over the fact that Obama and Hillary were willing to work with the Russians. It's so obvious that the reason the left has an issue with it is because Trump is the president.
Well, I see Stone as a flake with bad judgment, but he does seem to be serious in a way that gay-basher Colbert does not.
Stone is always questioning the common meme of events, whatever it may be. The liberals loved this when the R's were in power.
Think about what a dufus Obama was when it came to Putin.
Talking up a "reset", as if the Bush administration had bunged Russian relations.
The way he said Putin would realize what a mistake it was to go in to Syria and he'd have to go back out.
The way Obama mocked the press for noticing Putin rolled his eyes at Obama.
The way he said Russia must not interfere with the Ukraine and then just let them have it.
And now, we are to believe, he told Vlad to "cut it out" when our entire voting process was under attack, allowing Obama's own chosen candidate to unfairly lose an election.
Think of what Russia has been through in the last 100 years. WWI, the Russian Civil War, Communist revolution, starving of the peasants, Stalin's purges, WWII, the cold war, the collapse of the Soviet Union the rise of Russian organized gang networks, etc. - maybe 50 million dead because of the form of government plus another 45 million or so killed in the wars.
How many Russians have died in the last 20 years from starvation, war or government brutality? Maybe Stone might have mentioned Putin's absurd popularity and approval rating in Russia. Is the world better off or worse off that someone of Putin's power and charisma has been able to get Russia under control after the collapse of the USSR. Oh and now Putin wants to have better relations with the U.S. Oh the horror.
Colbert strikes me as a smug prick with no perspective or wisdom. I won't watch him.
I haven't watched anything by Oliver Stone in decades, but I know that he tends to play rather fast and loose when it comes to historical accuracy. He always struck me as being far more interested in creating stories that help perpetuate his particular world view (but presenting them as though it were fact) rather than hewing close to the actual truth. Given that, I take everything he says with a dump truck full of salt.
As for Putin, I think of him sort of like a mafia don; ruthless but controlled and understandable. When our interests align it may make sense to work with him, but we should always remember who he is. Remember Alexander Litvinenko, the 1999 apartment bombings, the various killed and disappeared journalists, Crimea ect.
Colbert fears that Stone will demonstrate that Colbert is an ignoranus. (Spelling intentional). And it is a well founded fear. Heck your Aunt Mabel from Muleshoe Missouri could do that to Colbert as well.
And no, I'm no fan of Stone. Wall Street 2 was ridiculous, and he too much loves socialist dictators like Chavez and Castro. But that used to be ok with the left.
Neo-commie meets neo-fascist, the war continues...
The Intelligence Community's bogus and never-ending "investigation" of Russian meddling in the 2016 election is an excuse to investigate all of President Trump's associates who might be linked to Russia (business deals, tourist trips, etc.) The ultimate goal is to find crimes that can be prosecuted in order to undermine Trump's support network.
During the mid-1960's when the FBI's leadership wanted to remove Martin Luther King from his leadership of the Civil Rights Movement, there was a similar bogus and never-ending investigation into Russian meddling in the Civil Rights Movement. Supposedly in order to catch the Russians' meddlers, the FBI bugged MLK's telephone calls and bedrooms.
The FBI's MLK-hating leadership then used the wiretap information to blackmail MLK and to leak salacious information to MLK-hating journalists.
What the FBI was doing then is similar to what the FBI has been doing now.
Special Counsel (former FBI Director) Robert Mueller has three top goals:
1) whitewash the FBI
2) whitewash the recent FBI Director "Crazy Comey the Leaker"
3) Convict a scapegoat in order to prove that the FBI's Russiagate investigation was valid and worthwhile.
=======
In the Watergate affair, the FBI leadership played a key role by leaking information to Nixon-hating journalists. The leaker "Deep Throat" was FBI Assistant Director Mark Felt.
FBI Director "Crazy Comey the Leaker" had intended to play a similar role in removing President Trump from office.
I doubt there are many lefties in the US who are against Putin for any reason other than because it's part of being against Trump. If Trump suddenly turns against Putin, or vice versa, they will probably turn for him, the same way they were against Comey before they were for Comey before they were against him.
I find it hilarious the people who openly sided with the Soviet Union during the entire Cold War are now the very, same people getting the vapors over some sort of made-up Russian connection.
Not a huge fan of Oliver Stone, but compared to most Hollywood airheads, he is a Mensa scholar.
The problem is that he was traumatized in Vietnam, and thereafter adopted a hard-core Left-wing view of America, focusing on the warts, but not the beauty.
But, Stone is right here. He didn't get the DNC memo to demonize Putin and Russia. And why should he? The Memo did not come put until after Hillary lost. If Hillary had won, all of these Russian collusion stories would evaporate into thin air like cotton candy.
I'm not a fan of Putin or Russia. But, they are acting much better than the Communist predecessors, so I grade on a curve. Also, we should share an interest with the Rooskies fighting Islamic terrorism -- so there's that.
Think of what Russia has been through in the last 100 years.
Yes, talk about a case of PTSD !
Russia is a dying country but Putin has done about as well as any Russian leader could do. Of course he is a thug !
Does anyone else remember the saying "Gorbachev has iron teeth?" from back before he started Perestroika.
The Russians have not had a non-thug as ruler, with the possible exception of Peter the Great, since Ivan was "Prince of Moscow" before there was a Russia.
I think I get it ; Stone is an old school far leftist and as such he is a reflexive communist sympathizer and a rabid anti-American. So admiring Putin comes very naturally to him. Colbert, on the other hand, is a partisan democrat (as is 90% of print and broadcast media) and thus leftist causes are only embraced when politically expedient. (The democrat leadership is primarily (possibly only) interested in the acquisition & maintenance of overwhelming national political power.)
Stone is an honest & true believer leftist, and thus doesn't think in terms of partisan advantage, as does Colbert.
"Stone may be just a very strange guy..."
I am certain of this. His JFK movie was pure rant and lies from start to finish except for the superb presentation of the Zapruder film. Oliver Stone has a significant talent for telling a story well in a visual way, but his movies are seriously corrupted by his own seriously corrupted -and false- ideation. You really shouldn't watch his movies at all. I regard them as evil.
Good thing he wasn't one of the many Russian journalist killed or jailed and lost in the last eight years, other wise this white wash might not have made the air.
roesch/voltaire said...
Good thing he wasn't one of the many Russian journalist killed or jailed and lost in the last eight years, other wise this white wash might not have made the air.
6/13/17, 2:35 PM
Let's not pretend you actually care about Russian journalists lives. It's all just a convenient excuse to bash the Republicans with.
The Russians have not had a non-thug as ruler, with the possible exception of Peter the Great, since Ivan was "Prince of Moscow" before there was a Russia.
Er, wasn't Yeltsin all right?
roesch/voltaire said...
Good thing he wasn't one of the many Russian journalist killed or jailed and lost in the last eight years, other wise this white wash might not have made the air.
Great Scott, man, get a hold of yourself. For a serial killer you don't have much presence do you?
I think this is pretty illustrative of Colbert's shtick and his audience.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IGl1CCprCeU
Substitute Trump of Republicans in this case.
Ann Althouse said...
"I'm not an Oliver Stone fan. Haven't seen skme of his most famous films. Wall street. JFK. Dislike Platoon. Doors was not good. Like Talk Radio and People Versus Larry Flynt."
"People Versus Larry Flynt" was directed by Miloš Forman.
I am Laslo.
No doubt that Putin is a bad guy.
How great was the guy who installed the Muslim Brotherhood, left a vacuum in Libya and ignored the Arab Spring? Tell me again how great that guy, who helped kill tens of thousands of more was. Can I pre-miss him?
of should be or
Oliver Stone may know how to make a film, but when it comes to foreign policy and history he is ill-informed, naive, sympathetic to wacky conspiracy theories and unwilling to study or engage with facts before running his mouth or his camera. It's a little surprising that he gets financing for his projects, but our big tent of a country has various gullible choirs eager for instruction from any number of nutty preachers.
Yes, he takes himself seriously and sees himself as a brave truth speaker. Serious people of all persuasions generally regard him with appropriate skepticism.
I think the left is bewildered a bit why "Why do some Conservatives seem to admire Putin!"
It's not admiring Putin. It's recognizing that Putin is the only major Western leader that actually supports his country and his people.
Putin wants Russia to be a great power. Does Merkel want Germany to succeed? What about Macon and France? Corbyn? Obama? That idiot in Canada?
No, Putin and people like Havel and a few Eastern European countries actually want their society and people to succeed. Our leaders until Trump didn't.
If only we could oust Putin. He is the only thing standing in the way of Russia becoming a liberal democracy where prancing ponies play on rainbows.
Hey! Here's a thought. Not all of the world's leaders are on board with liberal democracy, some are outright evil, but the US is needs to deal with them regardless.
This why Democratic, and most Republican, candidates were deemed unviable. Well, one of several reasons.
Elective war! What is it good for? Catastrophic Anthropogenic Immigration Reform... Libyan oil, Syrian right of way, and Russian technology (and natural resources).
Colbert says that Trump never has anything bad to say about Putin.
Refresh my memory. What bad things did Obama and Hillary have to say about Putin?
,but I don't know why Colbert doesn't show respect to Stone...
Sure you do. He's an asshole whose Trump hate trumps all other norms. Putin (the topic) is only a vehicle to carry his cackling idiot audience to the Trumphate they came to bask in.
Some seem to forget that Obama sent back 35 diplomats/spies and closed down the Russian compound the Trump folks want to give back-- for starters that is the contrast. My point was obvious if Stone had tired anything other than good PR the filming wouldn't have happened.
AAlthouse: "... since so much of the anti-Trump agenda is premised on the foundation that Russia is the enemy and Putin is evil."
Hmm? I think Colbert et al.'s anti-Trump agenda is premised on the idea that Trump is evil. Putin's putative interference in the election gives them an angle, but take that away and they'd still be vehemently, sometimes violently anti-Trump.
Michael: "Russia is a dying country but Putin has done about as well as any Russian leader could do. Of course he is a thug !"
Russia is not a dying country.
A kleptocracy? Yes, but when wasn't it?
A nation comprised of many highly educated people with a history of violence and oppression mixed with superior criminal capabilities combined with one of the stronger militaries on the globe....hmm.
A superpower? No.
A power? Yes.
Platoon is pretty damned good. Seriously.
And Salvador!
Some seem to forget that Obama sent back 35 diplomats/spies and closed down the Russian compound the Trump folks want to give back
Its not so much that I forgot, more like I just don't care.
"Some seem to forget that Obama sent back 35 diplomats/spies and closed down the Russian compound the Trump folks want to give back-- for starters that is the contrast."
He did that only after years of sucking up to the Russians.
From stopping the deployment of missile interceptors in Poland to making mockery of Romney's concerns about Russia a key foreign policy point in 2012 Obama basically gave them everything they wanted until he was ultimately humiliated by their invasion of Ukraine and backing of Syria.
And it wasn't that the Russians were suddenly acting any different that cause this shift (they'd been doing this stuff all along), it was that they basically made him look impotent on the world stage.
This is why people don't take the left seriously on this matter. Foreign policy hawks may hate Trump regarding his personal feelings about NATO but they don't forget that the left views the fall of the Soviet Union as a tragedy and not a triumph. They don't forget that Obama was willing to cut Eastern Europe out at the knees, and that he only changed his mind after it began to hurt his image.
"Doors" is pretty damned good too.
Thanks Christopher, you saved me the trouble.
Oliver Stone may know how to make a film, but when it comes to foreign policy and history he is ill-informed, naive, sympathetic to wacky conspiracy theories and unwilling to study or engage with facts before running his mouth or his camera. It's a little surprising that he gets financing for his projects, but our big tent of a country has various gullible choirs eager for instruction from any number of nutty preachers.
Yes, he takes himself seriously and sees himself as a brave truth speaker. Serious people of all persuasions generally regard him with appropriate skepticism.
Drago:
Russia's Demographic "Crisis": How Real Is It?
https://www.rand.org/pubs/issue_papers/IP162/index2.html
Dying? Maybe not. Declining? Definitely.
Blogger roesch/voltaire said...
"Some seem to forget that Obama sent back 35 diplomats/spies and closed down the Russian compound the Trump folks want to give back-- for starters that is the contrast. My point was obvious if Stone had tired anything other than good PR the filming wouldn't have happened."
The 80's called and they want their foreign policy back.
Now you are supposed to guffaw and talk with your friends about how stupid Romney is.
Or did you get different orders from your masters this time? You people are just really stupid tools.
Good thing he wasn't one of the many Russian journalist killed or jailed and lost in the last eight years, other wise this white wash might not have made the air.
Tell that to Walter Duranty.
Christopher:
Russians did not invade Ukraine. They backed the refugees of the Western-backed coup in Ukraine.
Obama was humiliated in Syria, yes. But not sufficiently to shame him to back the refugees of his war and stop the emigration crisis.
stone is out-lefted and colbert provides schooling to him in regards to audience laughter. stone takes care some itchy ear and cheek. how do all these theater people still let chair heights dictate who should dominate and submit? isn't there a contract clause for that? stone looks puffy right? but doesn't sound like a drunk. newsweek describes him as a "once-respected filmmaker is valiantly defending the Russian strongman Vladimir Putin." his tomorrow we'll speak about "heavier stuff" sounds so sixties and vladimir must want to vomit wasting his time with this beached debauched blowhard. this interview is like one of those cubist paintings with fully a recognisable shard here and there, resulting in a composition that just shows the dissolution of the world, but in this case the lefty world. actually the so-called thug Vlad comes out looking like the only one with a compass.
Althouse said...but I don't know why Colbert doesn't show respect to Stone...
Colbert is a smug asshole with an agenda. That pretty much says it all.
Mike, I didn't mean to copy your asshole part. I read the comments after posting.
That guy's got a big f**kin' head! Like an old, weathered rock you find in a field.
I think Stone actually helped draft Red Dawn. Maybe a bit of a Leftist naïf when it comes to Putin but a guy aiming for art nonetheless.
Stone and Seagal, you've got Putin. Don't let him get inside the paint. Penn: Chavez. Rodman stay on Pyongyang in the low post.
Team on three!
"During the mid-1960's when the FBI's leadership wanted to remove Martin Luther King from his leadership of the Civil Rights Movement, there was a similar bogus and never-ending investigation into Russian meddling in the Civil Rights Movement.
************************
Ditto during the Vietnam era, when the DOJ went balls to the wall to prove that the anti-war movement was being funded by the Russkies and Chicoms.
In the end, all they ended up with was a lame-ass conviction of priests Daniel Berrigan and his brother Phil for conspiracy and destruction of government property.
The property? Draft cards.
Yes, a Russki general claimed years later that they had funded the US anti-war movement to the tune of $1 billion, but TO THIS DAY no one's ever found evidence to substantiate the claim. NOt on the Russian end, or on ours.
But we're told ...again and again, that top men....TOP MEN...are employed in our counter-intelligence operations!!
Blogger roesch/voltaire said...
"Some seem to forget that Obama sent back 35 diplomats/spies"
Why do you suppose he did that? Check the timing. I don't think his motives were what you think they were.
If the film is art, the narrative will unfold, and we must give it the full 4 hours before we say what we think of what Stone did. That's what I am doing. He does create in the first 15 minutes a sense of great sorrow at the condition of the former Soviet Union, which Putin inherited. That begins a story. Let's see where it goes. It can end up very critical. The story of Hitler begins in a similar way.
Stone seems to have the more traditional outlook toward Russia. Leftists have always been admirers of Marxist dictators until recently. Now it seems Colbert and his idiot audience are mimicking the John Birchers of the 20th century. Just weird. Things have turned 180 degrees when it comes to how we view Russia in this country. Of course, I'm not stupid. I realize it's all just politics and next week or next year maybe the left will go back to loving good ol' Marxist Stalinist Putin and the right will go back to thinking he's the devil incarnate.
Colbert is worse than Hitler and Putin.
Colbert is a smug asshole with an agenda. That pretty much says it all.
From National Review on Colbert at the Tonys.
When Stephen Colbert appeared late in the show, to bestow the award for best musical revival, he awkwardly tried to segue into a contrived bit about Trump’s supposedly being a revival act, was rewarded with groans when he made a lame joke about the beauty pageant in Miss Saigon being the only one “whose dressing room our president has not walked in on,” and shot back, peevishly, “A lot of Trump fans here tonight!” You know your anti-Trump shtick is failing when a room consisting of 5,000 liberal Democrats doesn’t bite.
I may be wrong, but I think Dostoevsky is still one of the best insights to the Russian common man's soul. We may not like Putin. The Russians do, and will continue to do so.
BTW, since we are not capable of conducting an election with clear results in this country I suggest we outsource the next one to the Russians. Those guys know what they are doing.
Stone directed "On Any Given Sunday", possibly the greatest football movie. So there's that.
He does seem rather strange in this interview. He walks out as if he's confused about what this place is that he's wandered out into.
Stone lost his train of thought when Colbert claimed to be a journalist.
It took Putin less tan 30 seconds to see thru Obama and judge him to be a complete fraud whose only talent is to talk well without saying anything. Obama immediately sensed Putin was on to him. Ever since, Obama and his horde of progressive minions have hated him.
I don't much care for Oliver Stone, but the question he asked is a good one.
I may be wrong, but I think Dostoevsky is still one of the best insights [into] the Russian common man's soul. We may not like Putin. The Russians do, and will continue to do so.
I know from first-hand experience that what we expect from our leadership and what Russian's expect and admire are diametrically opposite. I got an opportunity to do show boar hunting (feral swine eradication, actually) in the Belgorodsky District near the Ukranian border. The people there are proud descendants of the Zaporozhian Cossacks who were and remain fiercely patriotic. Russians aren't Communists. If anything they're monarchists. If a Romanov heir appeared and made a bid for the imperial crown the support he'd garner would be impressive, to say the least. The Russian's attitude to Stalin is flatly contradictory, but a Westerner can never convince him of that. He hates him for his cruelty and loves him in equal measure. The average Russian credits Stalin for winning the Great Patriotic War and ignores the Red Tsar's role in causing the calamity in the first place. The perception of Putin is remarkably similar, he gets most of the credit for Russia's economic revival after the humiliations of the 1990s, and whatever human rights violations he's gulity of he ignores or rationalizes.
Russians' heroic endurance at Stalingrad won the War and simultaneously saved England, France, Norway, the United States and China.
Now the Russians need NATO to protect Russia (and the same countries ) from the Germans disguised as leader of a European Union.
Putin is not a problem.
It's been a hundred years trying to convince dems that Russia is a Bad Guy. Finally. Now. Is there anything Donald Trump can't do?
Colbert is the worst case of Drudge derangement syndrome... on television.
In magazine editorship, it's David Remnick of The New Yorker who has ruined that venerable publication for the same sick reason.
Post a Comment