Liberal Airhorn Robert De Niro Uses Award Speech to Bash Trump...
I was going to title this "Robert De Niro Wins Award, Shows He's a Grade-A Assclown," but that might be a little to rock 'n roll for the Facebook censors. Either way, it's obvious Stallone landed one too many punches when filming Grudge Match.
De Niro, the award's 44th recipient, was making the point that the "mean-spirited" Trump administration ought to stop targeting arts programs — he mentioned the National Endowment for the Arts, National Endowment for the Humanities and Corporation for Public Broadcasting, which would be eliminated under the president's budget proposal — "for their own divisive political purposes."De Niro, who said he wanted to punch Donald Trump shortly before the election, said on Monday, to massive applause, "I call it what it is: bullshit."
He further noted that the namesake of his award, Charlie Chaplin, was "an immigrant who probably wouldn't pass today's 'extreme vetting,'" adding, "I hope we're not keeping out the next Chaplin."
That's right, Hoss. Charlie Chaplin would be banned because he was from one of seven countries with terrorism problems. You know, except he wasn't. Facts are inconvenient sometimes, but pompous speeches are forever. But Chaplain not being a self-exploding terrorist is the least problematic aspect about this. That honor is reserved for how De Niro says this administration wants to eliminate PBS "for its own divisive political purposes."
Two points:
- Defunding a non-essential television channel is not "divisive." Just because you don't LIKE something doesn't make it divisive. Not how words work, Bob. Conservatives want it defunded because it's an illegitimate role of government. As cute as Elmo is. Also, Elmo is on HBO now, so stop it with the Sesame Street woes.
- Going on his premise, why WOULD it be divisive to nix NOVA? Is that because PBS, and by proxy NPR, the shining beacon of unbiased journalism is actually... politically divisive? Is De Niro claiming Trump wants to defund PBS because of unfavorable coverage? Which may be true, but again wouldn't the "divisive" people be those who are dependent on government funds to stay in business... like PBS? And doesn't it seem, according to De Niro's own words, PBS has a vested interest in slighting those in office (Trump) who don't believe in PBS' bloated place in government?
It's fine and dandy to like PBS, as it does air Masterpiece Theater. But last I checked the Constitution and Declaration, there is no clause which states "The government shall fund and support public broadcasting for viewers like you." To be sure, I lit up my copy under a fancy light after applying special ink, since that's what Nic Cage told me to do, and saw even less evidence. There was no passage which stated, "Fund the commercial-free television because of Downton Abbey and Sherlock, especially when bloated actors use a self-aggrandizing speech to lecture the current administration about it, OMG."
Go make a sequel to Bad Grandpa, dumbass.
