Dalton Trumbo....Re-Polished

[Camp]

1. Who are the dimwits who get their news from Jon Stewart, and their history from Oliver Stone?
Yup....and these morons go out and vote Democrat.
Why? Because they're lied to....and accept the lies.

a. "Many millennials are about to lose their most-trusted news source: Jon Stewart" Many millennials are about to lose their most-trusted news source Jon Stewart - The Washington Post
[millennials: bornfromtheearly1980stolate1990s,]
Here's why that is significant: "The latest poll to drive home that point comes from the Public Religion Research Institute, which finds more than one in 10 young adults (ages 18-29) say they trust "The Daily Show"or its now-departed spinoff, "The Colbert Report,"the most to tell them what's going on in the world."
Ibid.

Of course, it's been revealed that Stewart was a shill for Obama....

You start your OP with an exaggerated so called fact that being so exaggerated makes it a lie. Your link shows that only less than 10% of millennials are about to loose a so called trusted news source. The article starts out by claiming "many" and you go on to imply a significant number of millennials are loosing their trusted news source. It's one in ten people. Ask 10 millennials on the street if they trust Jon Stewart for their news and 9 of them will answer "NO". Calling him a main source of trusted news is a distortions and you are basing your entire concept on this dopey distortion.
This was pointed out by another poster in post #3.

 

[PoliticalChic]

1. Who are the dimwits who get their news from Jon Stewart, and their history from Oliver Stone?
Yup....and these morons go out and vote Democrat.
Why? Because they're lied to....and accept the lies.

a. "Many millennials are about to lose their most-trusted news source: Jon Stewart" Many millennials are about to lose their most-trusted news source Jon Stewart - The Washington Post
[millennials: bornfromtheearly1980stolate1990s,]
Here's why that is significant: "The latest poll to drive home that point comes from the Public Religion Research Institute, which finds more than one in 10 young adults (ages 18-29) say they trust "The Daily Show"or its now-departed spinoff, "The Colbert Report,"the most to tell them what's going on in the world."
Ibid.

Of course, it's been revealed that Stewart was a shill for Obama....

You start your OP with an exaggerated so called fact that being so exaggerated makes it a lie. Your link shows that only less than 10% of millennials are about to loose a so called trusted news source. The article starts out by claiming "many" and you go on to imply a significant number of millennials are loosing their trusted news source. It's one in ten people. Ask 10 millennials on the street if they trust Jon Stewart for their news and 9 of them will answer "NO". Calling him a main source of trusted news is a distortions and you are basing your entire concept on this dopey distortion.
This was pointed out by another poster in post #3.

While you strive mightily to prove you are not a fool and a liar....
....alas...
....for naught.


"The latest poll to drive home that point comes from thePublic Religion Research Institute, which finds more than one in 10 young adults (ages 18-29) say they trust "The Daily Show"or its now-departed spinoff, "The Colbert Report,"the most to tell them what's going on in the world."


And this...

"It’s hard to overstate Stewart’s influence. A 2010 Rasmussen pollfound that nearly one in three millennials thought that shows like “The Daily Show” and “The Colbert Report” were taking the place of traditional newscasts, including 30 percent of under-30s. About two in five said they thought the shows helped people stay abreast of current events, and more than one in five said the shows at least somewhat helped shape their political views."
So, where will millennials get their 'news' now?


Now go wipe that egg off your face.

No...wait....it looked better partly hidden behind albumen.

 

[NYcarbineer]

[

a. "Many millennials are about to lose their most-trusted news source: Jon Stewart" Many millennials are about to lose their most-trusted news source Jon Stewart - The Washington Post
[millennials: bornfromtheearly1980stolate1990s,]
Here's why that is significant: "The latest poll to drive home that point comes from the Public Religion Research Institute, which finds more than one in 10 young adults (ages 18-29) say they trust "The Daily Show"or its now-departed spinoff, "The Colbert Report,"the most to tell them what's going on in the world."
Ibid.

.

lol, PC posts that 9 out of 10 young people do not consider the Daily Show to be their most trusted news source and in the weirdest twist of illogic

uses that to make a point about young people and the Daily Show.

 

[PoliticalChic]

[

a. "Many millennials are about to lose their most-trusted news source: Jon Stewart" Many millennials are about to lose their most-trusted news source Jon Stewart - The Washington Post
[millennials: bornfromtheearly1980stolate1990s,]
Here's why that is significant: "The latest poll to drive home that point comes from the Public Religion Research Institute, which finds more than one in 10 young adults (ages 18-29) say they trust "The Daily Show"or its now-departed spinoff, "The Colbert Report,"the most to tell them what's going on in the world."
Ibid.

.

lol, PC posts that 9 out of 10 young people do not consider the Daily Show to be their most trusted news source and in the weirdest twist of illogic

uses that to make a point about young people and the Daily Show.

"It’s hard to overstate Stewart’s influence. A 2010 Rasmussen poll found that nearly one in three millennials thought that shows like “The Daily Show” and “The Colbert Report” were taking the place of traditional newscasts, including 30 percent of under-30s. About two in five said they thought the shows helped people stay abreast of current events, and more than one in five said the shows at least somewhat helped shape their political views."
So, where will millennials get their 'news' now?

 

[Camp]

This is how you deflect. You have changed the criteria and lowered the bar. Your original claim was that Stewart was a trusted news source. I pointed out you were exaggerating to the point of lying because one in ten millennials claiming to trust Stewart enabled you to distort a poll. You distorted and manipulated a poll that indicated 9 out of 10 millennials do not view Stewart as a trusted news source. Now you are including "shows like" Stewart and Colbert Report and a poll simply stating that these shows help people stay abreast of political views. In other words, people think these kinds of shows are informative in that they show different view points. Has nothing to do with "trusting".
You are attempting to make a point that is a fallacy. Millennials gather news from multiple sources, mostly social media. They get news from multiple sources on their smart phones and computer screens. The entire concept of your OP is just plain silly. People in their 20's and 30's don't wait around for a satirical TV show on the comedy network to gather trustworthy news. Who would believe such nonsense?

 

[NYcarbineer]

[

a. "Many millennials are about to lose their most-trusted news source: Jon Stewart" Many millennials are about to lose their most-trusted news source Jon Stewart - The Washington Post
[millennials: bornfromtheearly1980stolate1990s,]
Here's why that is significant: "The latest poll to drive home that point comes from the Public Religion Research Institute, which finds more than one in 10 young adults (ages 18-29) say they trust "The Daily Show"or its now-departed spinoff, "The Colbert Report,"the most to tell them what's going on in the world."
Ibid.

.

lol, PC posts that 9 out of 10 young people do not consider the Daily Show to be their most trusted news source and in the weirdest twist of illogic

uses that to make a point about young people and the Daily Show.

"It’s hard to overstate Stewart’s influence. A 2010 Rasmussen poll found that nearly one in three millennials thought that shows like “The Daily Show” and “The Colbert Report” were taking the place of traditional newscasts, including 30 percent of under-30s. About two in five said they thought the shows helped people stay abreast of current events, and more than one in five said the shows at least somewhat helped shape their political views."
So, where will millennials get their 'news' now?

Are you trying to deny that you stupidly posted a poll that more or less proved your premise stupid?

 

[NYcarbineer]

This is how you deflect. You have changed the criteria and lowered the bar. Your original claim was that Stewart was a trusted news source. I pointed out you were exaggerating to the point of lying because one in ten millennials claiming to trust Stewart enabled you to distort a poll. You distorted and manipulated a poll that indicated 9 out of 10 millennials do not view Stewart as a trusted news source. Now you are including "shows like" Stewart and Colbert Report and a poll simply stating that these shows help people stay abreast of political views. In other words, people think these kinds of shows are informative in that they show different view points. Has nothing to do with "trusting".
You are attempting to make a point that is a fallacy. Millennials gather news from multiple sources, mostly social media. They get news from multiple sources on their smart phones and computer screens. The entire concept of your OP is just plain silly. People in their 20's and 30's don't wait around for a satirical TV show on the comedy network to gather trustworthy news. Who would believe such nonsense?

She posted a poll that showed almost twice as many young people get their news from Foxnews,

which actually is even funnier in its own way because nobody was better than Jon Stewart at showing what a propagandistic bunch of fools, charlatans, liars, and buffoons the Foxnews people are.

 

[Camp]

This is how you deflect. You have changed the criteria and lowered the bar. Your original claim was that Stewart was a trusted news source. I pointed out you were exaggerating to the point of lying because one in ten millennials claiming to trust Stewart enabled you to distort a poll. You distorted and manipulated a poll that indicated 9 out of 10 millennials do not view Stewart as a trusted news source. Now you are including "shows like" Stewart and Colbert Report and a poll simply stating that these shows help people stay abreast of political views. In other words, people think these kinds of shows are informative in that they show different view points. Has nothing to do with "trusting".
You are attempting to make a point that is a fallacy. Millennials gather news from multiple sources, mostly social media. They get news from multiple sources on their smart phones and computer screens. The entire concept of your OP is just plain silly. People in their 20's and 30's don't wait around for a satirical TV show on the comedy network to gather trustworthy news. Who would believe such nonsense?

She posted a poll that showed almost twice as many young people get their news from Foxnews,

which actually is even funnier in its own way because nobody was better than Jon Stewart at showing what a propagandistic bunch of fools, charlatans, liars, and buffoons the Foxnews people are.

Eventually liars get caught up and confused about their lies. PC reached that point long ago, but now it has overwhelmed her. The bullshit is overflowing into the tops of her boots.

 

[NYcarbineer]

This is how you deflect. You have changed the criteria and lowered the bar. Your original claim was that Stewart was a trusted news source. I pointed out you were exaggerating to the point of lying because one in ten millennials claiming to trust Stewart enabled you to distort a poll. You distorted and manipulated a poll that indicated 9 out of 10 millennials do not view Stewart as a trusted news source. Now you are including "shows like" Stewart and Colbert Report and a poll simply stating that these shows help people stay abreast of political views. In other words, people think these kinds of shows are informative in that they show different view points. Has nothing to do with "trusting".
You are attempting to make a point that is a fallacy. Millennials gather news from multiple sources, mostly social media. They get news from multiple sources on their smart phones and computer screens. The entire concept of your OP is just plain silly. People in their 20's and 30's don't wait around for a satirical TV show on the comedy network to gather trustworthy news. Who would believe such nonsense?

She posted a poll that showed almost twice as many young people get their news from Foxnews,

which actually is even funnier in its own way because nobody was better than Jon Stewart at showing what a propagandistic bunch of fools, charlatans, liars, and buffoons the Foxnews people are.

Eventually liars get caught up and confused about their lies. PC reached that point long ago, but now it has overwhelmed her. The bullshit is overflowing into the tops of her boots.

My advice to PC, try having one thought at a time, and use the energy you save by making sure that one thought has some merit.

 

[NYcarbineer]

The Low Information Dem voter still believes that McCarthy's huac blacklisted innocent Hollywood writers like Zero Mostel.

Progs lie

And lie

And lie

And lie

And lie

Truth is the first casualty of the Progressives Jihad to acquire political power

HUAC, the House Un-American Activities predated McCarthy by almost 15 years and was created just before WWII and outdated him by more than that. McCarthy was in the Senate NOT the House and had nothing to do with HUAC! What was that you were saying about low information voters?

You beat me to it.


These weird and fictional rants by Political Chic are followed closely by other low-info types and none of them question the facts of any of the links.

"These weird and fictional rants by Political Chic..."

Well...if they're 'fictional,' you should be able to show them so....

...but if you're a liar and a fool, you won't be able to.


Waiting.

I posted the truth in what you posted that demolished the point you were trying to make.

 

[David_42]

PC gets crushed for the millionth time and runs around in circles.

 

[ThoughtCrimes]

[

a. "Many millennials are about to lose their most-trusted news source: Jon Stewart" Many millennials are about to lose their most-trusted news source Jon Stewart - The Washington Post
[millennials: bornfromtheearly1980stolate1990s,]
Here's why that is significant: "The latest poll to drive home that point comes from the Public Religion Research Institute, which finds more than one in 10 young adults (ages 18-29) say they trust "The Daily Show"or its now-departed spinoff, "The Colbert Report,"the most to tell them what's going on in the world."
Ibid.

.

lol, PC posts that 9 out of 10 young people do not consider the Daily Show to be their most trusted news source and in the weirdest twist of illogic

uses that to make a point about young people and the Daily Show.

"It’s hard to overstate Stewart’s influence. A 2010 Rasmussen poll found that nearly one in three millennials thought that shows like “The Daily Show” and “The Colbert Report” were taking the place of traditional newscasts, including 30 percent of under-30s. About two in five said they thought the shows helped people stay abreast of current events, and more than one in five said the shows at least somewhat helped shape their political views."
So, where will millennials get their 'news' now?

Pineapples and Tangerines! Hey Chica...lay down...you're dead!!!!

 

[PoliticalChic]

This is how you deflect. You have changed the criteria and lowered the bar. Your original claim was that Stewart was a trusted news source. I pointed out you were exaggerating to the point of lying because one in ten millennials claiming to trust Stewart enabled you to distort a poll. You distorted and manipulated a poll that indicated 9 out of 10 millennials do not view Stewart as a trusted news source. Now you are including "shows like" Stewart and Colbert Report and a poll simply stating that these shows help people stay abreast of political views. In other words, people think these kinds of shows are informative in that they show different view points. Has nothing to do with "trusting".
You are attempting to make a point that is a fallacy. Millennials gather news from multiple sources, mostly social media. They get news from multiple sources on their smart phones and computer screens. The entire concept of your OP is just plain silly. People in their 20's and 30's don't wait around for a satirical TV show on the comedy network to gather trustworthy news. Who would believe such nonsense?

How long will it take for you to recognize that I am never wrong?

It took me no time at long to recognize you to be a liar and a fool.

"....a poll simply stating that these shows help people stay abreast of political views."

Ooooo....look at you trying to tap-dance around the point!



And....btw....it wasn't just my point: I was quoting fusion, and the Washington Post.

Let's review:
The herd, i.e., the Liberal masses, are led by such bastions of and unimpeachable sources as Jon Stewart, Oliver Stone, and the honorable Hollywood producers who are about to release a fabrication with the intention of making the communist Dalton Trumbo a veritable American hero!

Kind of explains how you manage to be wrong time after time, huh?

 

[Camp]

This is how you deflect. You have changed the criteria and lowered the bar. Your original claim was that Stewart was a trusted news source. I pointed out you were exaggerating to the point of lying because one in ten millennials claiming to trust Stewart enabled you to distort a poll. You distorted and manipulated a poll that indicated 9 out of 10 millennials do not view Stewart as a trusted news source. Now you are including "shows like" Stewart and Colbert Report and a poll simply stating that these shows help people stay abreast of political views. In other words, people think these kinds of shows are informative in that they show different view points. Has nothing to do with "trusting".
You are attempting to make a point that is a fallacy. Millennials gather news from multiple sources, mostly social media. They get news from multiple sources on their smart phones and computer screens. The entire concept of your OP is just plain silly. People in their 20's and 30's don't wait around for a satirical TV show on the comedy network to gather trustworthy news. Who would believe such nonsense?

How long will it take for you to recognize that I am never wrong?

It took me no time at long to recognize you to be a liar and a fool.

"....a poll simply stating that these shows help people stay abreast of political views."

Ooooo....look at you trying to tap-dance around the point!



And....btw....it wasn't just my point: I was quoting fusion, and the Washington Post.

Let's review:
The herd, i.e., the Liberal masses, are led by such bastions of and unimpeachable sources as Jon Stewart, Oliver Stone, and the honorable Hollywood producers who are about to release a fabrication with the intention of making the communist Dalton Trumbo a veritable American hero!

Kind of explains how you manage to be wrong time after time, huh?

Not all Americans are as shallow as you. People can disagree with a persons politics but respect their tenacity to stand up for what they believe in. Not everyone sees the world as black and white or good and bad. They see the shades of grey.
Your prediction and silly prophesy that a movie will make Trumbo a veritable American hero is silly and naive. Just like your evaluation about the influence of a satirical TV show. It will simple highlight a period of American history that many have forgotten or don't know about. All spectrum's of the world of political ideologies have it's storytellers to convey messages.
Stone makes controversial movies and purposely gives his audiences excuses to review, argue and debate with passion. That is why his films become award winning hits and that is why they make money. Successful movies means more than just profit for an artist. It means the artist will have no problem finding investors for their next film.

 

[PoliticalChic]

7. So, Hollywood is about to release this fictional paean to communist Dalton Trumbo....rife with lies, as is the wont of Leftists.


How much suffering and ruination did he have to go through? Almost none....compared for the plans he had for his fellow Americans.


“Appearing before HCUA in October 1947 with Alvah Bessie,Herbert J. Biberman,Lester Cole,John Howard Lawson, 'Ring Lardner Jr' ,Albert Maltz,Adrian Scott, andSamuel Ornitz, Trumbo - like the others - refused to answer any questions. In a defense strategy crafted by CPUSA [Communist Party USA] lawyers, the soon-to-be-known-as "Hollywood 10" claimed that the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution gave them the right to refuse to answer inquiries into their political beliefs as well as their professional associations.


HCUA cited them for contempt of Congress, and the Hollywood 10 were tried and convicted on the charge. All were fined and jailed, with Trumbo being sentenced to a year in federal prison and a fine of $1,000. He served 10 months of the sentence.


The Hollywood 10 were blacklisted by the Hollywood studios, a blacklist enforced by the very guilds they helped create. Trumbo and the other Hollywood 10 screenwriters were kicked out of the Screen Writers Guild (John Howard Lawsonhad been one of the founders of the SWG and its first president), which meant, even if they weren't blacklisted, they could not obtain work in Hollywood. Those who continued to write for the American cinema had to do so under assumed names or by using a "front", a screenwriter who would take credit for their work and pass on all or some of the fee to the blacklisted writer."
Dalton Trumbo - Biography - IMDb

 

[Camp]

7. So, Hollywood is about to release this fictional paean to communist Dalton Trumbo....rife with lies, as is the wont of Leftists.


How much suffering and ruination did he have to go through? Almost none....compared for the plans he had for his fellow Americans.


“Appearing before HCUA in October 1947 with Alvah Bessie,Herbert J. Biberman,Lester Cole,John Howard Lawson, 'Ring Lardner Jr' ,Albert Maltz,Adrian Scott, andSamuel Ornitz, Trumbo - like the others - refused to answer any questions. In a defense strategy crafted by CPUSA [Communist Party USA] lawyers, the soon-to-be-known-as "Hollywood 10" claimed that the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution gave them the right to refuse to answer inquiries into their political beliefs as well as their professional associations.


HCUA cited them for contempt of Congress, and the Hollywood 10 were tried and convicted on the charge. All were fined and jailed, with Trumbo being sentenced to a year in federal prison and a fine of $1,000. He served 10 months of the sentence.


The Hollywood 10 were blacklisted by the Hollywood studios, a blacklist enforced by the very guilds they helped create. Trumbo and the other Hollywood 10 screenwriters were kicked out of the Screen Writers Guild (John Howard Lawsonhad been one of the founders of the SWG and its first president), which meant, even if they weren't blacklisted, they could not obtain work in Hollywood. Those who continued to write for the American cinema had to do so under assumed names or by using a "front", a screenwriter who would take credit for their work and pass on all or some of the fee to the blacklisted writer."
Dalton Trumbo - Biography - IMDb

You just don't get it. You are allowed to free speech and can say whatever you want. It is your freedom and you do it here on this message board almost daily. You are a citizen with free speech. You can also discriminate under most circumstances if you are not doing it as a business owner or part of a commercial endeavor. Film makers can make whatever kind of films they want and they can tell their stories the way they want. They have free speech too. You have a right to criticize the movies. That is how it works.
HUAC and later the era of McCarthy was about the promotion of discrimination against peoples political and ideological beliefs by elected members of Congress, i.e., the US government. It was about limiting freedoms provided for in the constitution. It was about putting people on trial at government expense for activities that were legal and labeling them anti American. Americans who had simple participated in their constitutional freedoms were being punished by the US Congress via a handful of elected officials. The congressmen used extortion to bring about punishment to those they disliked.
The fact we have people today who do the same thing as those horrible congressmen did more than a half century ago should give cause for celebration that a guy like Stone has made a movie about how America can be corrupted and marginalized when real history is forgotten and replaced with the revisionist garbage promoted by the PoliticalChics of the day.

 

[PoliticalChic]

" People can disagree with a persons politics but respect their tenacity to stand up for what they believe in." From the dope in post #74.



8. Feeling sorry for this Liberal/communist paragon?

The poor rich communist who aimed to make America like the Soviet Union....where his idol Stalin slaughtered millions of his own citizens?


"Dyadkin estimated that the USSR suffered 56 to 62 million"unnatural deaths" during that period, with 34 to49 milliondirectly linked to Stalin. In “Europe A History,” British historian Norman Davies counted50 millionkilled between1924-53, excluding wartime casualties." How Many People Did Joseph Stalin Kill?

Yet some fool will say "People can disagree with a persons politics but respect their tenacity to stand up for what they believe in."


Idolize him for his striking out for free speech and the right to support Stalin?


Not so fast:


" In 1949, Arthur Schlesinger Jr., wrote in The Saturday Review of Books, that Trumbo was in fact NOT a free speech martyr since he would not fight for freedom of speech for ALL the people, such as right-wing conservatives, but only for the freedom of speech of CPUSA members.

The anti-communist Schlesinger, a Pulitzer Prize-winning Harvard historian, thought Trumbo and others like him were doctrinaire communists and hypocrites."
Dalton Trumbo - Biography - IMDb



Schlesinger was a Liberal when Liberal didn't mean communist.

 

[Camp]

7. So, Hollywood is about to release this fictional paean to communist Dalton Trumbo....rife with lies, as is the wont of Leftists.


How much suffering and ruination did he have to go through? Almost none....compared for the plans he had for his fellow Americans.


“Appearing before HCUA in October 1947 with Alvah Bessie,Herbert J. Biberman,Lester Cole,John Howard Lawson, 'Ring Lardner Jr' ,Albert Maltz,Adrian Scott, andSamuel Ornitz, Trumbo - like the others - refused to answer any questions. In a defense strategy crafted by CPUSA [Communist Party USA] lawyers, the soon-to-be-known-as "Hollywood 10" claimed that the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution gave them the right to refuse to answer inquiries into their political beliefs as well as their professional associations.


HCUA cited them for contempt of Congress, and the Hollywood 10 were tried and convicted on the charge. All were fined and jailed, with Trumbo being sentenced to a year in federal prison and a fine of $1,000. He served 10 months of the sentence.


The Hollywood 10 were blacklisted by the Hollywood studios, a blacklist enforced by the very guilds they helped create. Trumbo and the other Hollywood 10 screenwriters were kicked out of the Screen Writers Guild (John Howard Lawsonhad been one of the founders of the SWG and its first president), which meant, even if they weren't blacklisted, they could not obtain work in Hollywood. Those who continued to write for the American cinema had to do so under assumed names or by using a "front", a screenwriter who would take credit for their work and pass on all or some of the fee to the blacklisted writer."
Dalton Trumbo - Biography - IMDb

PoliticalChic is reviewing a movie that has not been released to the public and won't be until November. She is just pissed off that some film makers might very well expose her heroes for being degenerate anti Americans who promoted discrimination and began laying the foundation for a police state until the nation came to it's senses and rejected their nonsense. Chances are those who refused to rat out their friends and coworkers suffered the consequences of not selling out those friends and coworkers will be viewed as heroic. The folks who ratted out their friends and coworkers might be viewed differently. Wonder who the sell outs and rats were?

 

[PoliticalChic]

7. So, Hollywood is about to release this fictional paean to communist Dalton Trumbo....rife with lies, as is the wont of Leftists.


How much suffering and ruination did he have to go through? Almost none....compared for the plans he had for his fellow Americans.


“Appearing before HCUA in October 1947 with Alvah Bessie,Herbert J. Biberman,Lester Cole,John Howard Lawson, 'Ring Lardner Jr' ,Albert Maltz,Adrian Scott, andSamuel Ornitz, Trumbo - like the others - refused to answer any questions. In a defense strategy crafted by CPUSA [Communist Party USA] lawyers, the soon-to-be-known-as "Hollywood 10" claimed that the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution gave them the right to refuse to answer inquiries into their political beliefs as well as their professional associations.


HCUA cited them for contempt of Congress, and the Hollywood 10 were tried and convicted on the charge. All were fined and jailed, with Trumbo being sentenced to a year in federal prison and a fine of $1,000. He served 10 months of the sentence.


The Hollywood 10 were blacklisted by the Hollywood studios, a blacklist enforced by the very guilds they helped create. Trumbo and the other Hollywood 10 screenwriters were kicked out of the Screen Writers Guild (John Howard Lawsonhad been one of the founders of the SWG and its first president), which meant, even if they weren't blacklisted, they could not obtain work in Hollywood. Those who continued to write for the American cinema had to do so under assumed names or by using a "front", a screenwriter who would take credit for their work and pass on all or some of the fee to the blacklisted writer."
Dalton Trumbo - Biography - IMDb

PoliticalChic is reviewing a movie that has not been released to the public and won't be until November. She is just pissed off that some film makers might very well expose her heroes for being degenerate anti Americans who promoted discrimination and began laying the foundation for a police state until the nation came to it's senses and rejected their nonsense. Chances are those who refused to rat out their friends and coworkers suffered the consequences of not selling out those friends and coworkers will be viewed as heroic. The folks who ratted out their friends and coworkers might be viewed differently. Wonder who the sell outs and rats were?

No, you imbecile....I'm reminding readers why this nation has fallen to the level it has....

There are actually people like you who refuse to recognize evil.

Communism is evil....Stalin was evil incarnate.

Dalton Trumbo was his acolyte.

And you're too stupid to see it.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Name droppers are so funny.