adplus-dvertising
Connect with us

Politics

Oscars & Politics: Steve Martin Dings Iowa, Brad Pitt Skewers Senate In Mostly Apolitical Ceremony – Deadline

Published

5 years ago

 on


The Oscars kicked off with an immediate political dig, not at not President Donald Trump but at the Iowa Caucuses. A few mild smacks at the Senate impeachment trial and health care followed, but the night was decidedly apolitical, even with U.S. politics stormier than ever. Maybe everyone’s had it. Maybe Parasite won so many awards that it limited the potential opining.

“Now, a couple of years ago there was a big disaster here at the Oscars when they accidentally read the wrong name. And it was nobody’s fault. But it’s guaranteed that this will not happen this year because the Academy has switched to the new Iowa caucus app,” Steve Martin joked in the non-host opening monologue with Chris Rock. He was referring to 2017, when Warren Beatty mistakenly gave the Best Picture win to La La Land over Moonlight, and to the February 3 Democratic debacle in Iowa that still hasn’t announced a winner.

Martin quickly shushed Rock when his co-non-host mentioned the homeless problem in Los Angeles. “SO MANY STARS!” Martin shouted over him, gesturing at the audience.

Rock tried again. “Mahershala Ali is here. He has two Oscars. Do you know what that means when the cops pull him over? Nothing!”

Brad Pitt, winning for Actor in a Supporting Role, was the only one to call out impeachment, noting that the 45 seconds he was getting for his acceptance speech is “45 seconds more” than the Senate gave former National Security Advisor John Bolton to testify at Trump’s Senate trial. “I’m thinking maybe Quentin [Tarantino] does a movie about it, and in the end the adults do the right thing,” the Once Upon a Time in Hollywood actor said of his director.

Speaking backstage, when asked about his comments, Pitt said, “I was just really disappointed with this week. I think when gamesmanship trumps doing the right thing, it’s a sad day. I don’t think we should let it slide, and I’m really serious about that.”

Presenter Josh Gad was ready with a health-care jab via Frozen. “Canadian Elsa is basically the same but with health care,” the actor and voice of Olaf said.

Accepting for Best Documentary Oscar for American Factory, co-director Julia Reichert gave a shout out to workers. “Our film is from Ohio and China but really could be from anywhere that people put on a uniform and punch a clock trying to make their families have a better life. Working people have it harder and harder these days and we believe that things will get better when workers of the world unite.”

And toward the tail of the telecast, Joaquin Phoenix, Best Actor for Joker, talked about animal rights, humanity and the environment. “At times we feel or are made to feel that we champion different causes,” he said.

Renee Zellweger, accepting the Best Actress statuette for Judy, hinted that Hollywood could help bring people together. “When we look to our heroes we agree, and that matters. Heroes unite and define us,” she said, mentioning Fred Rogers, Harriet Tubman and Judy Garland – all subjects of nominated biopics – and a handful of others from Venus and Serena Williams to Bob Dylan, soldiers, policemen and firefighters. “When we celebrate our heroes, we are reminded of who we are as one people united.”

That was about it. Nothing even remotely resembling Robert de Niro declaring “F*ck Trump” at the 2018 Tony Awards, or Meryl Streep slamming the then-President Elect as a “bully” at the 2017 Globes.

It goes to show, you never know. Sunday’s ceremony capped an ultra-fraught and weird several weeks in an already nasty political climate where  Trump was acquitted in trial with no witnesses, publicly eviscerating political opponents and relieving three of them of their jobs on Friday. He also awarded Rush Limbaugh the Presidential Medal of Freedom at his State of the Union address.

Oscars TV Review: Eminem Can’t Save Another Hostless Night For Hollywood, Despite ‘Parasite’s Historic Best Picture Win

The Golden Globes last month were more pointed, touching on the then escalating situation with the U.S. and Iran, the urgency of pro-choice politicians in office and the 2020 presidential election. Many speakers mentioned devastating fires in Australia fires and connected them to climate change.

The 2019 Academy Awards had a number pointed reference to Trump and his policies as celebs spoke out in defense of immigrants and against walls.

Ricky Gervais would be proud of the restraint tonight. When he returned as host of the Golden Globes last month he memorably reminded the audience, “If you win, come up, accept your little award tonight… thank your agent and your God, and f*ck off. No one cares about your views on politics or culture.”

Earlier today, Gervais goaded on Twitter: “”I can’t wait to hear all your inspirational speeches about equality, and it’s great that the 3 hours you’re here tonight is the only time your badly paid migrant house staff will get some time off to sleep this week.”

Let’s block ads! (Why?)

728x90x4

Source link

Related Topics:
Continue Reading

News

Technology upgrades mean speedier results expected for B.C. provincial election

Published

18 hours ago

 on

September 26, 2024

By

 

British Columbians could find out who wins the provincial election on Oct. 19 in about the same time it took to start counting ballots in previous votes.

Andrew Watson, a spokesman for Elections BC, says new electronic vote tabulators mean officials hope to have half of the preliminary results for election night reported within about 30 minutes, and to be substantially complete within an hour of polls closing.

Watson says in previous general elections — where votes have been counted manually — they didn’t start the tallies until about 45 minutes after polls closed.

This will B.C.’s first general election using electronic tabulators after the system was tested in byelections in 2022 and 2023, and Watson says the changes will make the process both faster and more accessible.

Voters still mark their candidate on a paper ballot that will then be fed into the electronic counter, while networked laptops will be used to look up peoples’ names and cross them off the voters list.

One voting location in each riding will also offer various accessible voting methods for the first time, where residents will be able to listen to an audio recording of the candidates and make their selection using either large paddles or by blowing into or sucking on a straw.

The province’s three main party leaders are campaigning across B.C. today with NDP Leader David Eby in Chilliwack promising to double apprenticeships for skilled trades, Conservative Leader John Rustad in Prince George talking power generation, and Greens Leader Sonia Furstenau holding an announcement Thursday about mental health.

It comes as a health-care advocacy group wants to know where British Columbia politicians stand on six key issues ahead of an election it says will decide the future of public health in the province.

The BC Health Coalition wants improved care for seniors, universal access to essential medicine, better access to primary care, reduced surgery wait times, and sustainable working conditions for health-care workers.

It also wants pledges to protect funding for public health care, asking candidates to phase out contracts to profit-driven corporate providers that it says are draining funds from public services.

Ayendri Riddell, the coalition’s director of policy and campaigns, said in a statement that British Columbians need to know if parties will commit to solutions “beyond the political slogans” in campaigning for the Oct. 19 election.

This report by The Canadian Press was first published Sept. 26, 2024.

The Canadian Press. All rights reserved.

Source link

Continue Reading

Politics

How Many Votes Are Needed for a Vote of No Confidence in Canada?

Published

18 hours ago

 on

September 26, 2024

By

In Canadian parliamentary democracy, a vote of no confidence (also known as a confidence motion) is a crucial mechanism that can force a sitting government to resign or call an election. It is typically initiated when the opposition, or even members of the ruling party, believe that the government has lost the support of the majority in the House of Commons.

What Is a Vote of No Confidence?

A vote of no confidence is essentially a test of whether the government, led by the prime minister, still commands the support of the majority of Members of Parliament (MPs) in the House of Commons. If the government loses such a vote, it is either required to resign or request the dissolution of Parliament, leading to a general election.

This process upholds one of the fundamental principles of Canadian democracy: the government must maintain the confidence of the elected House of Commons to govern. This rule ensures accountability and provides a check on the government’s power.

How Many Votes Are Needed for a No Confidence Motion?

In the Canadian House of Commons, there are 338 seats. To pass a vote of no confidence, a simple majority of MPs must vote in favor of the motion. This means that at least 170 MPs must vote in support of the motion to cause the government to lose confidence.

If the government holds a minority of seats, it is more vulnerable to such a vote. In this case, the opposition parties could band together to reach the 170 votes required for the no-confidence motion to succeed. In a majority government, the ruling party has more than half the seats, making it more difficult for a vote of no confidence to pass, unless there is significant dissent within the ruling party itself.

Types of Confidence Votes

  1. Explicit Confidence Motions: These are motions specifically introduced to test whether the government still holds the confidence of the House. For example, the opposition might move a motion stating, “That this House has no confidence in the government.”
  2. Implicit Confidence Motions: Some votes are automatically considered confidence motions, even if they are not explicitly labeled as such. The most common example is the approval of the federal budget. If a government loses a vote on its budget, it is seen as losing the confidence of the House.
  3. Key Legislation: Occasionally, the government may declare certain pieces of legislation as confidence matters. This could be done to ensure the support of the ruling party and its allies, as a loss on such a bill would mean the collapse of the government.

What Happens If the Government Loses a Confidence Vote?

If a government loses a confidence vote in the House of Commons, two outcomes are possible:

  1. Resignation and New Government Formation: The prime minister may resign, and the governor general can invite another leader, typically the leader of the opposition, to try to form a new government that can command the confidence of the House.
  2. Dissolution of Parliament and General Election: The prime minister can request that the governor general dissolve Parliament, triggering a general election. This gives voters the opportunity to elect a new Parliament and government.

Historical Context of Confidence Votes in Canada

Canada has seen several instances of votes of no confidence, particularly during minority government situations. For example, in 2011, the government of Prime Minister Stephen Harper lost a vote of confidence over contempt of Parliament, which led to the dissolution of Parliament and the federal election.

Historically, most no-confidence votes are associated with budgetary issues or key pieces of legislation. They can be rare, especially in majority governments, as the ruling party usually has enough support to avoid defeat in the House of Commons.

To pass a vote of no confidence in Canada, at least 170 MPs out of 338 must vote in favor of the motion. This vote can lead to the government’s resignation or a general election, making it a powerful tool in ensuring that the government remains accountable to the elected representatives of the people. In the context of Canadian democracy, the vote of no confidence is a key safeguard of parliamentary oversight and political responsibility.

Continue Reading

Politics

Feds eyeing new ways to publicly flag possible foreign interference during elections

Published

19 hours ago

 on

September 26, 2024

By

 

OTTAWA – A senior federal official says the government is mulling new ways to inform the public about possible foreign interference developments during an election campaign.

Under the current system, a panel of five top bureaucrats would issue a public warning if they believed an incident — or an accumulation of incidents — threatened Canada’s ability to have a free and fair election.

There was no such announcement concerning the 2019 or 2021 general elections.

Allen Sutherland, an assistant secretary to the federal cabinet, told a commission of inquiry today that officials are looking at how citizens might be told about developments that don’t quite reach the current threshold.

He said that would help inform people of things they ought to know more about, even if the incidents don’t rise to the level of threatening the overall integrity of an election.

Allegations of foreign interference in the last two general elections prompted calls for the public inquiry that is now underway.

This report by The Canadian Press was first published Sept. 26, 2024.

The Canadian Press. All rights reserved.

Source link

Continue Reading

Trending