He will be lucky to get a job in a McDonald's in the future....he has risen to black list status I believe...

go. Such a waste of talent.

It's been a long time.

like the felon. The felon is not going to anything to help. He feeds off tragedy and destruction. And he'll place blame on somebody else that's his MO. Covid blamed China, the 2020. election blamed the election results. He's a POS.

He is such a whiney republicon. So tragic.

While I didn't really read any of that with focus, I thought he'd also made some anti-climate change political (nasty) comments about Biden too.

Again, I tend to ignore him, but that had caught my eye.

I don't get it.

Maybe you can post it again.

... oh, wait, that has already happened.

he portrayed the assassin of Medgar Evers in an Evers biopic. That was the perfect part for him, because I don't think he was really acting!

And made him like the slimeball he is...

Today he would make him the hero

When I saw that I looked up his net worth, because IMO he's basically a character actor and I can't name a single film he's been in since Casino in 1995. He's never been a box office draw. Nobody ever went to see a movie because James Woods was in it.

His part was earlier in the film, I believe, because Lehman Brothers failed early and he was playing the CEO. Easy part for him as the character was bitter and angry about the company falling spart and his "white horse" deal getting snaked.

Contact? He played an asshole in that film.

Oh, wait.

I was a big fan
He was in many great ones

Definitely a box office film.

I liked him in some earlier roles, including Contact. He was the lead character in the Cronenberg film "Videodrone," which I also liked. I hate that he's a flaming asshole.

It is human nature for some people to assume the worst.

But he specifically said he lost it, stated as a fact and not an assumption. Then he used that “assumption” to trash firefighters, Newsom, and DEI. There’s no need to defend him.

It tests your soul, losing everything at once, I must say.

In the conversation, Woods also revealed that due to the quick spread of the wildfires, he and his wife could only evacuate with "the clothes on our backs."

He also revealed that "there was so much chaos" in that moment and that the fires burnt, "like an inferno."

The latest word on that is that his home is still standing. He never said it wasn't - During the period he didn't know whether it was standing or not, what he sais was that he didn't know one way or the other.

...that really doesn't equate to lying regardless of what else he may have been saying. So, in reality, the OP seems closer to actually lying, but upthread it seems to have been stated that the OP's ends justify means.

So much for any sense of standards, I suppose.

He LIED.

My grandma's brother owned a house in the Oakland hills and was forced to evacuate. It was a mess and so scary since it wasn't clear what had burned and what hadn't. Eventually, he was informed by the fire department that every house on his street had burned to the ground. I still remember hearing him sobbing into the phone telling my grandma the house was gone and that they lost everything. She then got off the phone and told us what we already knew: his house burned down.

How horrible. No hope. No maybe. It was gone.

A day or two later, they were permitted to return back to their neighborhood and like a miracle, their house was not burned down. The whole street was not a loss like originally told to them. Their house and a couple others actually survived with only smoke and heat damage.

He called my grandma back sobbing again that the info was not correct. Most the street had burned sadly but not all of it.

I don't think he lied. He was told one thing that turned out to not be true.

and sobbed about it without verifying its accuracy. He lied.

Got it.

...the facts, but that does not a lie make. It just means that the person had a false belief. That seems an exceptionally plain standard of interpretation. Aside from that, there is the principle of charity in communication: one should presume good will when interpreting communications. I can see where that attitude may have been completely lost in dealing with MAGA et al and the other aspects of Woods' communications etc., but that still does not make a false belief a lie instead of merely an inaccuracy. The article was really clear on his knowledge of the situation in his neighborhood.

It might be a better practice for one not to lie to oneself as a means of harboring, stoking, or ameliorating personal political anger, so one can stay clear on reality.

Intention is important in defining whether one is lying. Some say the speaker must intend to deceive in order for the speech to constitute a lie. Others disagree.

...additionally, it is amusing to see the words "philosophers" and "consensus" in the same sentence.

One might almost say that philosophers have no consensuses and leave it there. It might even be almost true.

of what he was told or what he believed? Because if you don't you're making excuses for someone who has a history of lying to push right wing bs.

and you’re making excuses for a rich white male celebrity with a history of lying. We should let republicans do that.

...actually means nothing other than establishing some sort of suspicion. That suspicion says nothing about the actual truth of the situation at hand. (Is it really necessary to state this difference?) Beyond that, what does "race" have to do with anything in this? The information contained in the statement in the article has no "race". (It sounds more like your position is straying into the realm of something prejudicial instead of analytic.) Still beyond that, the relative wealth of the person has no relationship to the truth of the information in the article, etc.

There is so much wrong with your statement from a data analytic position that you probably should just delete it. But you might want to examine it carefully since it seems to expose what you wish to substitute for the idea of truth in argumentation.

Woods lied about the 2020 election and many other things in support of right wing causes. He has no credibility. He used the false claim his house was burned down to attack democrats. Then reversed himself when the truth came out. Like Trump he’s just another rich white male celebrity. I refuse to be sycophantic apologist for such people.

Woods lied just as he lied many times in the past. Deal with it.

And Woods lied.

on a plane during 9-11 .

That's what I thought happened. He might have thought it was going to burn down. The facts got in the way of his tirade. But it won't slow him down with his stupid lies blaming people.

he's still a worthless right winger with absolutely no brains.

That happened to my great uncle once. He was told his street was a total loss and a devastated but when he returned a few days later, to his surprise, his house was actually still standing. Only a few homes survived despite most the street being a total loss.

He didn't just assume it was burned down. He was told it was burned down but it was not correct information.

If not, then the only available evidence shows he made an untrue statement, i.e. lied.

I am appalled at how low the fascist republican party has gone with the dishonesty and nonstop flow of lies.

I am not at all surprised by that loser Woods telling lies to the media to help the felon and support the hate for california from the fascist party.

I kinda wish he wasn't lying...you know...that his house really did burn down...

Repugs do-lie.

the only roles I can recall him playing were characters TOO close to the real deal, apparently.

Entitled bloviator. They all seem to be cast from the same sorry mold.

He really is a scumbag.

https://www.vulture.com/2017/09/amber-tamblyn-james-woods-open-letter.html

Amber Tamblyn Calls James Woods Part of the Problem in New Open Letter About Misogyny

Earlier this week, actor and conservative white-noise machine James Woods took to Twitter to cast aspersions on the new movie Call Me by Your Name. He had a particular bone to pick with the movie’s central romance being between a 24-year-old and a 17-year-old, an age difference that is technically illegal. “As they quietly chip away the last barriers of decency. #NAMBLA ,” Woods wrote in a retweet of criticism of the gay relationship. To which the movie’s star, Armie Hammer, responded, “Didn’t you date a 19 year old when you were 60 …….?” With Woods’s sketchy dating history entering the exchange, actress Amber Tamblyn entered the thread with an anecdote of her own, tweeting, “James Woods tried to pick me and my friend up at a restaurant once. He wanted to take us to Vegas. ‘I’m 16’ I said. ‘Even better’ he said.” Woods of course called Tamblyn a liar, and at first she defended herself with a receipt from the friend who was with her at the time, and now she’s gone all the way to Teen Vogue with an open letter asking the actor to do some soul-searching.

calling him a "blithering idiot".

Go ahead. It's simple. "You were right and I was wrong."

Walking.

In 2022, analysis conducted by researchers with the University of Washington's Center for an Informed Public and the Krebs Stamos Group found Woods was the top purveyor of election misinformation on Twitter during the late months of 2020.

Link to tweet

Link to tweet

Link to tweet

He knew it wasn't burned to nothing. He was just looking for attention. Like someone else around here.