Have any of u read "Stupid White Men"?

I actually really like The Beast.  Great film!

@JWW:

Borat (forgive me) did a very good job too! I was surprised that he was cast in that role and, IMO, he pulled it off very well. His one-liners, throughout the movie, had the audience chuckling. A few nice light moments for a somewhat grim, “les miserables” film.

100%…. and Helena Bonham Carter as well.

@F_alk:

Thanks for clearing that up…but, well the true patriot needs no flag to wave, but stays in his country and helps when the cr*p is piling up ;). Of course, he/she can warn before, but from an artist i would be disappointed if that warning was not metaphorical or otherwise creative.

You are welcome.

I enjoy artistic metaphors…Lewis Carroll comes immediately to mind.

Though here in the US the “STARS” do things like…

Steven Spielberg digitally remove the weapons, from the government officials in their decontamination suits, when he rereleased “ET” a second time. I think it odd that he did that in an anti-gun move. The idea was that they had guns so they were ‘bad guys.’

and

The “Charlie’s Angels” movie was made with the ‘good girls’ not carrying guns. Yet they defeat the ‘bad guys’ carrying Uzzies, etc… The original Angels were packing heat.

I think most of the backing came due to two facts:
(1) the USSR needed reforms, that was obvious.
Still, they probably wanted a long term leader that could be influenced => a younger one, after the two short reigns of Andropov and what-was-his-name… Probably, the influentials wanted some change, but surely not that much that it would threaten their power-base, one of the reasons for the coup that failed due to Jelzins help for Gorbachev.
(2) The general secretary and all the other positions he fills made him the most powerful man in the USSR. Probably, whoever put Gorbachev into place, underestimated him. Pretty much the same underestimation that Hitler faced when he was appointed Chancellor, but luckily Gorbachev used that to reform positively, and i consider the new freedom of information, the right to ask wether the party is right and that the crucial reform.

So, I don’t think that there was “real” backing, i believe Gorbachev was kind of a compromise candidate, kind of a makeshift. Of course, once he was into power, you ccouldn’t remove instantly, that would have meant that the party made a mistake (which was not “allowed” before Gorbachev). And he was clever enough to stay into power, and use his popularity at the beginning (which soon, after the economy started to collapse openly, was reduced to more or less nothing) to enforece the reforms.

yea that was me :)

I’m not sure you know what I mean

In some ways, yes. But I think “Dude, How’s is hangin’” is very appealing either.