![]() | This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
There is some confusion regarding this. His death was widely reported in the news on March 15, 2009 and the days after. But for some reason, right now (March 8, 2010), evidently the second most-read article on cnn.com is the article regarding his death. However, this article is still dated March 15, 2009. Before the next person edits the date of his death on this article, please provide an accurate source to verify the change. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Bunzobunzo ( talk • contribs) 07:21, 8 March 2010 (UTC)
Since Ron Silver is not a Democrat, it's incorrect to describe him as a "lifelong Democrat."
The character Ron Silver plays in "Heat Vision and Jack" is "a very dangerous man - his name is Ron Silver". http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6lWgXDOAJ5s Asat 04:58, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
I have added some info about the actor Ron Silver, about his movie career and mentioned his apperance in Fahrenhype 9/11.
—Preceding unsigned comment added by Michellebabe ( talk • contribs) 12:15, December 24, 2006
I have removed the sentence that says "Following his endorsement of president Bush, Silver was ostracized by hollywood..." According to his imdb page, Silver continued to have acting work until his death. Find a citation that says otherwise, please.... —Preceding unsigned comment added by Whenelvisdied ( talk • contribs) 20:33, 16 March 2009 (UTC)
"It's just baseless speculation to say otherwise"?! "there is no evidence that this belief was true"?! And just WHO are you to say that, Jdlund, pray tell? A Hollywood mogul?! An Actors' Guild insider?! Or simply someone whose instinctive, knee-jerk reaction, whenever (s)he hears something seemingly anti- liberal and/or pro- conservative, is to automatically dismiss it as unbelievable or exaggerated?! Are we allowed to quote somebody who knew Ron Silver personally (even if you — probably — don't like that person)?! Will the following citations do?!
"His social standing in Hollywood was revoked the moment he supported Bush and the Iraq War" writes [http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=92155 Ann Coulter] in Silver's Bravery Not an Act. "Ron did lose work, lose friends and lose his entire social apparatus. … Ron sometimes told me of the cruelty directed at him by his former friends, but never with bitterness or for publication."
And: "As with his impending death, Ron mostly joked about his banishment from the plutocracy. When I off-handedly mentioned in December 2004 that I had to get a Christmas tree, he told me he'd like to help, but having recently spoken at the Republican National Convention, the last thing he needed was to be seen walking through the streets of New York carrying a Christmas tree." Asteriks ( talk) 20:11, 22 March 2009 (UTC)
Quick Note: I again deleted the ostracized comment from the article. The reasons are given in a rather long and detailed fashion above. But to summarize why the specific deletion was done, it was because the only source given is an opinion piece which merely says he was ostracized but does not provide a single example, story, piece of evidence or reason to take this assertion as fact. Coulter says there are stories and examples but he didn't want it published, fine I guess that might be true but this can hardly be said as actually verifying the correctness of a claim for the purposes of a Wikipedia article. For all intents and purposes it remains speculation and if it is worded as being speculation or Silver's personal belief, or what have you, in the article it'll be fine but such a blatantly unverified claim should not be put into an article as fact. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jdlund ( talk • contribs) 07:38, 23 March 2009 (UTC)
Okay, I rewrote the paragraph to read: Ron Silver 'spoke at the United States 2004 Republican National Convention, continued to support President Bush, and was appointed Chairman for the Millennium Committee by New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani. Silver and friends of his said that following his endorsement of President Bush, he was ostracized by Hollywood, and on his blog on the Pajamas Media website, he wrote that his colleagues on the set of The West Wing would call him "Ron, Ron, the Neo-Con." ' So, with "Silver and friends of his said", we have Hollywood's ostracism not as a(n incontrovertible) fact, but as a he said, they said (which is a(n incontrovertible) fact). I trust this is OK with you? Asteriks ( talk) 14:11, 30 March 2009 (UTC)
…"it's not healthy to think in such extreme absolutes" writes Jdlund, with which I suppose I agree. Would you in turn agree that there is hardly anything more absolute than the sentence, "Your arguments are absurd"? (For someone saying, "It's cool … just try being a little less wound up and ready to blow", you sure write very long paragraphs…)
I am just about ready to let this matter drop, but I will point this out: Regarding Clint Eastwood's Flags of Our Fathers, one conservative website points out that the movie remakes American sacrifice and patriotism during WWII into vulgar excess and ignorance while one (prominent) conservative movie reviewer calls it another leftist distortion of our history, adding that Eastwood’s career suggests a pattern of bowing to the left. ("The film spends so much time on the boys’ ruthless handlers, caricatured politicians, cynical businessmen and shallow glad-handers that (if memory serves) it doesn’t even identify the names of all three who didn’t make it, much less make them full characters … This could have been the great American epic of the Second World War. Instead, the 2006 Flags is a post-modernist’s dream – flashback within flashback within flashback – as Eastwood and his writers 'deconstruct' the 'false' reality to give us the 'truth.' And their truth is a morally corrupted, hypocritical, racist, often silly country (with a fabricated scene about the alleged cynical role of President Roosevelt).") And no, Spencer Warren does not simply rave and rant, he uses reasoning and reasonable arguments…
Regarding the sequel, Warren writes: Typical of the reductionism of our more “sophisticated” age, we see only the subjective perspective of individuals, disconnected from the objective moral and historical context. This makes it hard to understand how these average Japanese guys could have murdered 250,000 – 300,000 people, many of them women and children, in their orgy of destruction in Nanking between December 1937 and March 1938. (The right is by no means monolothic either; here, various conservatives debate the amount of liberalism (if any) in Clint's movies…)
My arguments may be absurd, but there isn't much you have said that proves me wrong. You write, " Gary Sinise is a fairly accomplished actor in movies, television and on stage but somehow he doesn't work enough for you to consider him." Is it unfair to say that you write (or wrote): "Ron Silver is a fairly accomplished actor in movies, television and on stage but somehow he does work enough for you to consider all the" evidence to the contrary — his and his friends' own testimony — rubbish? As for Mel Gibson, one commentator (in the know) suggests that the outcry over what was a drunken spiel would hardly have been the never-ending scandal it evolved into, had Mel Gibson not made a film like The Passion of the Christ, but would have been forgiven much more quickly…
How about, say, Denzel Washington? How many times has he come out against gay marriage?! Once? Twice? We hardly see him making speeches against it all over the nation, do we?! (Contrary to the likes of George Clooney, Sean Penn, Susan Sarandon, Jane Fonda, and their outspoken passion for all their beliefs and pet projects…) Or commenting it as an offside during speeches on their latest film, whether related to the social or liberal subject talked about or not.
How many average people in America, in the world are even remotely aware that Denzel Washington holds, or has held, those beliefs?! I sure don't, and I have worked as a mainstream media journalist (I know, I know, it doesn't prove anything, let's not get further into an argument)… By contrast, who doesn't know about George Clooney, Sean Penn, Susan Sarandon, Jane Fonda, et al — all of whom — contrary to Denzel Washington (!) — are noted for political activism in their first or second Wikipedia paragraphs (usually the first couple of sentences)?!
In any case, you (deliberately?) overlooked the main point (which I deliberately left for the end of my previous post). In a film capital where one anti-Iraq war movie after another is made, a major film star could not get a studio to make one single pro- (or neutral) Iraq war movie?!?! As one critic said (shaking his head), Hollywood did recently make a movie honoring the United States Marine Corps, but they had to disguise the fact.
You claim I don't like Hollywood (isn't that "taking a basic assumption"?). No, Jdlund, what I don't like is unfairness; and what I don't like is double standards… (You sound like I am insulting Gary Sinise, and like you are defending his honor, when I am quite deliberately saying he would have more work — the work (and the celebrity) he quite certainly deserves — were Hollywood as pure as you seem to think…)
Indeed, I also happen to have worked in the film industry, and it is hardly unknown that if you espouse anything but leftist, progressive beliefs, you keep it to yourself or you keep as quiet as possible about them, or you may suffer or be asked to publicly renounce or denounce your views or the views of the film you appear in… (I am surprised you would use gay rights as an example when it is hardly unknown known the storm of criticism that bedeviled prominent VIPs or groups — in California, of all places — who did not support Prop. 8.) Witness also an outspoken conservative's having to "renounce" the conservative movie he was in — which is (normally!, i.e., when it is a liberal-leaning film, i.e, the norm) unheard of in the industry. Asteriks ( talk) 17:56, 3 April 2009 (UTC)
i met this man at the Obama Inauguration and i commented here just after that that he looked very ill when i saw him. that was removed, and now we find that he has died of cancer. maybe it shouldnt have been removed because he was going thru treatments for it. Statesboropow ( talk) 22:39, 16 March 2009 (UTC)
Yes Ron has passed away, R.I.P. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.171.37.139 ( talk) 22:52, 16 March 2009 (UTC)
Wikipedia is about verifiability and not truth? isnt one the other? the only reason i added it to the talk page was to maybe spark a source that might have been able to add something about this mans health problems. i didnt include it in the article, just the talk page. Statesboropow ( talk) 12:53, 22 March 2009 (UTC)
Some truths can be difficult or impossible to verify, such as when the subject has cancer and has been diagnosed with it, yet only he, his doctors, and a few people that know the subject well know about it, and they all keep it secret. It is true that for the last two years of Silver's life he had esophageal cancer and knew it. However, prior to his death, no reliable sources published it, hence we can't. For two years his cancer was an unverified truth. Nietzsche 2 ( talk) 17:57, 29 March 2009 (UTC)
Gee, where is the story about this famous line, when Ron Silver complained about military aircraft flyover during 1993? -- THE FOUNDERS INTENT PRAISE 19:02, 24 February 2010 (UTC)
Ron had a unique articulation -not really a lisp -anyone got any info on it ?--— Tumadoireacht Talk/ Stalk 04:50, 17 January 2011 (UTC)
This article says that in a Sky News interview, Silver called Sarah Palin's nomination a "deal breaker." The link to which this line is footnoted goes to a Sky News interview where he says no such thing, and in fact that he still intended to vote for McCain, thought Palin was a "brilliant" political choice but someone he had "some concerns" about. 71.234.44.10 ( talk) 00:09, 9 March 2013 (UTC)
![]() | This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
There is some confusion regarding this. His death was widely reported in the news on March 15, 2009 and the days after. But for some reason, right now (March 8, 2010), evidently the second most-read article on cnn.com is the article regarding his death. However, this article is still dated March 15, 2009. Before the next person edits the date of his death on this article, please provide an accurate source to verify the change. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Bunzobunzo ( talk • contribs) 07:21, 8 March 2010 (UTC)
Since Ron Silver is not a Democrat, it's incorrect to describe him as a "lifelong Democrat."
The character Ron Silver plays in "Heat Vision and Jack" is "a very dangerous man - his name is Ron Silver". http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6lWgXDOAJ5s Asat 04:58, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
I have added some info about the actor Ron Silver, about his movie career and mentioned his apperance in Fahrenhype 9/11.
—Preceding unsigned comment added by Michellebabe ( talk • contribs) 12:15, December 24, 2006
I have removed the sentence that says "Following his endorsement of president Bush, Silver was ostracized by hollywood..." According to his imdb page, Silver continued to have acting work until his death. Find a citation that says otherwise, please.... —Preceding unsigned comment added by Whenelvisdied ( talk • contribs) 20:33, 16 March 2009 (UTC)
"It's just baseless speculation to say otherwise"?! "there is no evidence that this belief was true"?! And just WHO are you to say that, Jdlund, pray tell? A Hollywood mogul?! An Actors' Guild insider?! Or simply someone whose instinctive, knee-jerk reaction, whenever (s)he hears something seemingly anti- liberal and/or pro- conservative, is to automatically dismiss it as unbelievable or exaggerated?! Are we allowed to quote somebody who knew Ron Silver personally (even if you — probably — don't like that person)?! Will the following citations do?!
"His social standing in Hollywood was revoked the moment he supported Bush and the Iraq War" writes [http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=92155 Ann Coulter] in Silver's Bravery Not an Act. "Ron did lose work, lose friends and lose his entire social apparatus. … Ron sometimes told me of the cruelty directed at him by his former friends, but never with bitterness or for publication."
And: "As with his impending death, Ron mostly joked about his banishment from the plutocracy. When I off-handedly mentioned in December 2004 that I had to get a Christmas tree, he told me he'd like to help, but having recently spoken at the Republican National Convention, the last thing he needed was to be seen walking through the streets of New York carrying a Christmas tree." Asteriks ( talk) 20:11, 22 March 2009 (UTC)
Quick Note: I again deleted the ostracized comment from the article. The reasons are given in a rather long and detailed fashion above. But to summarize why the specific deletion was done, it was because the only source given is an opinion piece which merely says he was ostracized but does not provide a single example, story, piece of evidence or reason to take this assertion as fact. Coulter says there are stories and examples but he didn't want it published, fine I guess that might be true but this can hardly be said as actually verifying the correctness of a claim for the purposes of a Wikipedia article. For all intents and purposes it remains speculation and if it is worded as being speculation or Silver's personal belief, or what have you, in the article it'll be fine but such a blatantly unverified claim should not be put into an article as fact. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jdlund ( talk • contribs) 07:38, 23 March 2009 (UTC)
Okay, I rewrote the paragraph to read: Ron Silver 'spoke at the United States 2004 Republican National Convention, continued to support President Bush, and was appointed Chairman for the Millennium Committee by New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani. Silver and friends of his said that following his endorsement of President Bush, he was ostracized by Hollywood, and on his blog on the Pajamas Media website, he wrote that his colleagues on the set of The West Wing would call him "Ron, Ron, the Neo-Con." ' So, with "Silver and friends of his said", we have Hollywood's ostracism not as a(n incontrovertible) fact, but as a he said, they said (which is a(n incontrovertible) fact). I trust this is OK with you? Asteriks ( talk) 14:11, 30 March 2009 (UTC)
…"it's not healthy to think in such extreme absolutes" writes Jdlund, with which I suppose I agree. Would you in turn agree that there is hardly anything more absolute than the sentence, "Your arguments are absurd"? (For someone saying, "It's cool … just try being a little less wound up and ready to blow", you sure write very long paragraphs…)
I am just about ready to let this matter drop, but I will point this out: Regarding Clint Eastwood's Flags of Our Fathers, one conservative website points out that the movie remakes American sacrifice and patriotism during WWII into vulgar excess and ignorance while one (prominent) conservative movie reviewer calls it another leftist distortion of our history, adding that Eastwood’s career suggests a pattern of bowing to the left. ("The film spends so much time on the boys’ ruthless handlers, caricatured politicians, cynical businessmen and shallow glad-handers that (if memory serves) it doesn’t even identify the names of all three who didn’t make it, much less make them full characters … This could have been the great American epic of the Second World War. Instead, the 2006 Flags is a post-modernist’s dream – flashback within flashback within flashback – as Eastwood and his writers 'deconstruct' the 'false' reality to give us the 'truth.' And their truth is a morally corrupted, hypocritical, racist, often silly country (with a fabricated scene about the alleged cynical role of President Roosevelt).") And no, Spencer Warren does not simply rave and rant, he uses reasoning and reasonable arguments…
Regarding the sequel, Warren writes: Typical of the reductionism of our more “sophisticated” age, we see only the subjective perspective of individuals, disconnected from the objective moral and historical context. This makes it hard to understand how these average Japanese guys could have murdered 250,000 – 300,000 people, many of them women and children, in their orgy of destruction in Nanking between December 1937 and March 1938. (The right is by no means monolothic either; here, various conservatives debate the amount of liberalism (if any) in Clint's movies…)
My arguments may be absurd, but there isn't much you have said that proves me wrong. You write, " Gary Sinise is a fairly accomplished actor in movies, television and on stage but somehow he doesn't work enough for you to consider him." Is it unfair to say that you write (or wrote): "Ron Silver is a fairly accomplished actor in movies, television and on stage but somehow he does work enough for you to consider all the" evidence to the contrary — his and his friends' own testimony — rubbish? As for Mel Gibson, one commentator (in the know) suggests that the outcry over what was a drunken spiel would hardly have been the never-ending scandal it evolved into, had Mel Gibson not made a film like The Passion of the Christ, but would have been forgiven much more quickly…
How about, say, Denzel Washington? How many times has he come out against gay marriage?! Once? Twice? We hardly see him making speeches against it all over the nation, do we?! (Contrary to the likes of George Clooney, Sean Penn, Susan Sarandon, Jane Fonda, and their outspoken passion for all their beliefs and pet projects…) Or commenting it as an offside during speeches on their latest film, whether related to the social or liberal subject talked about or not.
How many average people in America, in the world are even remotely aware that Denzel Washington holds, or has held, those beliefs?! I sure don't, and I have worked as a mainstream media journalist (I know, I know, it doesn't prove anything, let's not get further into an argument)… By contrast, who doesn't know about George Clooney, Sean Penn, Susan Sarandon, Jane Fonda, et al — all of whom — contrary to Denzel Washington (!) — are noted for political activism in their first or second Wikipedia paragraphs (usually the first couple of sentences)?!
In any case, you (deliberately?) overlooked the main point (which I deliberately left for the end of my previous post). In a film capital where one anti-Iraq war movie after another is made, a major film star could not get a studio to make one single pro- (or neutral) Iraq war movie?!?! As one critic said (shaking his head), Hollywood did recently make a movie honoring the United States Marine Corps, but they had to disguise the fact.
You claim I don't like Hollywood (isn't that "taking a basic assumption"?). No, Jdlund, what I don't like is unfairness; and what I don't like is double standards… (You sound like I am insulting Gary Sinise, and like you are defending his honor, when I am quite deliberately saying he would have more work — the work (and the celebrity) he quite certainly deserves — were Hollywood as pure as you seem to think…)
Indeed, I also happen to have worked in the film industry, and it is hardly unknown that if you espouse anything but leftist, progressive beliefs, you keep it to yourself or you keep as quiet as possible about them, or you may suffer or be asked to publicly renounce or denounce your views or the views of the film you appear in… (I am surprised you would use gay rights as an example when it is hardly unknown known the storm of criticism that bedeviled prominent VIPs or groups — in California, of all places — who did not support Prop. 8.) Witness also an outspoken conservative's having to "renounce" the conservative movie he was in — which is (normally!, i.e., when it is a liberal-leaning film, i.e, the norm) unheard of in the industry. Asteriks ( talk) 17:56, 3 April 2009 (UTC)
i met this man at the Obama Inauguration and i commented here just after that that he looked very ill when i saw him. that was removed, and now we find that he has died of cancer. maybe it shouldnt have been removed because he was going thru treatments for it. Statesboropow ( talk) 22:39, 16 March 2009 (UTC)
Yes Ron has passed away, R.I.P. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.171.37.139 ( talk) 22:52, 16 March 2009 (UTC)
Wikipedia is about verifiability and not truth? isnt one the other? the only reason i added it to the talk page was to maybe spark a source that might have been able to add something about this mans health problems. i didnt include it in the article, just the talk page. Statesboropow ( talk) 12:53, 22 March 2009 (UTC)
Some truths can be difficult or impossible to verify, such as when the subject has cancer and has been diagnosed with it, yet only he, his doctors, and a few people that know the subject well know about it, and they all keep it secret. It is true that for the last two years of Silver's life he had esophageal cancer and knew it. However, prior to his death, no reliable sources published it, hence we can't. For two years his cancer was an unverified truth. Nietzsche 2 ( talk) 17:57, 29 March 2009 (UTC)
Gee, where is the story about this famous line, when Ron Silver complained about military aircraft flyover during 1993? -- THE FOUNDERS INTENT PRAISE 19:02, 24 February 2010 (UTC)
Ron had a unique articulation -not really a lisp -anyone got any info on it ?--— Tumadoireacht Talk/ Stalk 04:50, 17 January 2011 (UTC)
This article says that in a Sky News interview, Silver called Sarah Palin's nomination a "deal breaker." The link to which this line is footnoted goes to a Sky News interview where he says no such thing, and in fact that he still intended to vote for McCain, thought Palin was a "brilliant" political choice but someone he had "some concerns" about. 71.234.44.10 ( talk) 00:09, 9 March 2013 (UTC)