Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : PRESIDENT GEORGE W. BUSH -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Srexley who wrote (244744)	4/2/2002 6:00:35 PM
From: ThirdEye	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 769670

Some things are impossible to fake. If you are one of those who thinks that the entire reaction and speech were contrived, then you would be granting such a remarkable degree of acting control to Berry as to suggest the choice of oscar winner was well made. Did this "help black people?" I don't know. Think back. Racial Firsts of almost any kind do seem to be significant in retrospect, don't they? Why is Hollywood prejudiced, you ask? First of all, none of this is ....um...black and white. What happens in the business of Hollywood is a reflection of the larger society, to a certain extent. Hollywood is prejudiced in favor of money. If it makes money, they invest. In that sense I would have to say Hollywood doesn't really believe in affirmative action as it may be practiced in, say, education. On the other hand, Poitier mentioned a string of people who took a chance on him--when it might not have been popular-people who did conscientiously open doors in an affirmative action sort of way. Was Poitier a phony manipulative, insincere lout the way Coulter savages Berry? Were those producers back then knee jerk racist liberals in the way Coulter savages contemporary Hollywood? In retrospect they don't look that way, do they? That's why I say Coulter has a giant chip on her shoulder.