Tuesday, October 21, 2008

Hollywood Conservatives: The Not-So-Gentle Post

Courtesy Pandagon, this bit of business from The Hollywood Reporter:

One "Big Hollywood" blogger is Andrew Klavan, an accomplished novelist-screenwriter who made a splash with a Wall Street Journal article comparing Batman and the "The Dark Knight" to President Bush and the war on terror.

"It's not easy being different," he said. "The liberals aren't all that liberal. We think they're wrong, but they think we're evil, and they behave like it."

Klavan said a producer, worried that Klavan's political reputation had become common knowledge, asked recently whether he could pitch something Klavan wrote but under an assumed name. Klavan declined.

"I don't want to be the Dalton Trumbo of the right," he said.


Quick history lesson for you kids fresh off the film school boat -- back in the late 40's the United States Congress hauled screenwriters in front of nationally broadcast hearings where they were essentially accused of treason. There, in front of flashing cameras and some very angry Congressmen, you were given a choice: finger a Commie to prove you weren't a Commie, or ... well, that was pretty much it. Some of the people who refused to rat out friends as members of the non-existent Hollywood Communist Conspiracy, like Dalton Trumbo, served time in federal penitentiaries. Over 300 were blacklisted by studios eager to kiss a little government ass. Their reputations, lives, and careers were publicly and permanently destroyed. Trumbo wound up writing under a pseudonym, and some fifteen odd years later found himself one of the few to be rehabilitated, primarily because he was a helluva writer.

Let me reiterate the bullet points:
  • nationally broadcast interrogation in front of the House of Representatives.
  • Implied treason.
  • Federal prison time.
  • Career and reputation permanently and utterly destroyed.

You know, folks, maybe your Hollywood friends seem to treat you a bit rudely not because they're illiberal, narrow-minded and judgmental, but perhaps -- just perhaps -- because you are such a self-pitying self-indulgent narcissist with your head so far up your ass that you equate "occasional discomfort during cocktail party conversations" with "BEING ON THE FUCKING BLACKLIST".

There. Glad to clear that up.

47 comments:

Richard Jensen said...

Well, that was quick!

Otter said...

I think you're still going to need a bigger cluebat to get through to them.

John said...

I would be curious as to the Rogers take on someone like Elia Kazan. I was severely criticized in my artistic circle for, after he died, noting what an incredible scumbag he was.

Actors and creative types are temperamental to be sure and will defend their objects of worship to the point of irrationality, but I'm sorry, some transgressions trump talent. Kazan's certainly did.

Mary Sue said...

What? History? Why are you mentioning history? History has nothing to do with current events!
[/historymajorsarcasmfont]

Joshua James said...

Another difference was, even after being black-listed, people still wanted to work with Trumbo. In fact, I believe he got Oscar nominated twice under his psuedonym while writing under the radar.

I find it the height of irony to read about codgers like Voight and Grammar and I forget who else complain about being discriminated against for being a conservative (very ironic coming from multi-millionare white guys) when in fact that people are under no obligation to work with you if they think YOU'RE A DICK . . . most of the time, people don't think about politics unless it's something very greviously wrong (i.e. the entire Bush Presidency).

If you're divorced from reality and obviously delusional, it only makes sense that few would want to work with you.

That's why people aren't lined up to work with Corey Haim right now (though as a Lost Boys fan, I hope he gets cleaned up and healthy).

Bottom line, if you're a dick, why should folks work with you?

Ian W. Hill said...

I don't know if Trumbo was nominated twice, but he WON once while blacklisted, under a psuedonym, for The Brave One.

GinaSmile said...

Showing off your liberal creds? Just like a liberal--my blacklist is worse than your blacklist. A conservative in Hollywood can't claim he's been blacklisted unless it happens just as it did in the 1950's? Not a very imaginative argument for a writer.

Here's what Robert J. Avrech said happened to him after he wrote Help, I'm a Hollywood Republican. "After the article was published I was fired from two screenwriting jobs. Both were pay or play deals. It's a measure of how deeply the producers despised me that they chose to pay off my full salary. In effect, paying me not to write." Mr. Avrech is an honorable man so please don't try to dismiss his experience as a just a business decision. He had the conversations with the producers. You didn't.

Jeff Wells wrote this in July in response to John Voight's article in the Washington Times:"Honestly? If I were a producer and I had to make a casting decision about hiring Voight or some older actor who hadn’t pissed me off with an idiotic Washington Times op-ed piece, I might very well say to myself, “Voight? Let him eat cake.”"


Yes, Wells offered a lame response when his thoughts started making the rounds."I was just indulging, in other words, in a feeling that I might have if I were a producer. There might be a momentary “f**k Jon Voight” impulse that I might feel or give voice to if I was in a position to hire him. Admit it — it feels good to stick it to people you don’t like or strongly disagree with."

Really? That last sentence reveals to me that liberals, of all people with their high and mighty ideals, are just like the folks they despise.

It's easy to claim someone's a dick or fucking moron when you can't hold a reasonable and rational discussion on an issue. Intellectual honesty during a conversation demands acknowledging another's point of view and experiences. It doesn't mean agreement. But to say that being openly conservative hasn't affected someone's career isn't even logical. Even Wells admitted he'd be tempted to stick it to a conservative. "Admit it — it feels good to stick it to people you don’t like or strongly disagree with." A normal human reaction that liberals deny because they lack substance in their argument. While your comment "You know, folks, maybe your Hollywood friends seem to treat you a bit rudely not because they're illiberal, narrow-minded and judgmental, but perhaps -- just perhaps -- because you are such a self-pitying self-indulgent narcissist with your head so far up your ass that you equate "occasional discomfort during cocktail party conversations" with "BEING ON THE FUCKING BLACKLIST"." is a nice bit of writer show-off but it doesn't address the substance of the argument Mr. Klavan makes. Calling names or dragging out your view of the 1950's doesn't negate his supposition.

From the comment section of The Cranky Conservaive blog:"Einah Teb says …
Let’s not even try to compare our disgust with Jon Voight to the horror of the McCarthy era.

Some of those blacklisted writers actually had to get other jobs, fire their pool boys, and clean their own houses for years. All because someone said “I don’t think I can work with someone who supports a regime that imprisons and murders its own people by the millions.”

Blacklisting conservatives is far different. After all, how can you work with someone who supports letting Iraqis vote?”"


Would you hire or work with a flaming conservative?

Rebecca said...

Okay, this is one of my top 3 favorite websites and I am in complete agreement with your politics, so this is really just meant as a gentle disagreement with the not-so-gentle post.

I don't think the comparison to Trumbo is that out of line. The man was being asked to use a pseudonym because of his political opinions. Regardless of the disparity between the severity of consequences, that fact alone (imo) is enough to make the comparison legitimate. Because Trumbo's name is a kind of shorthand for a writer who used a pseudonym because his political beliefs were a barrier to selling his work.

Although I found this post as entertaining and informative as any other I've found here, it brings up a point that has me just a little concerned. As thrilled as I am to have "my" party storming the White House and seeming to be on a crushing march to both houses of Congress, I do not want "us" to behave like "they" did in the same circumstances.

In other words, I don't even want people whose politics I abhor to have to use an assumed name in order to sell their work. Even given the fact that Hollywood is, and always has been, liberal - for which I am eternally grateful - there should ALWAYS be room for the opposing view.

We need to always remember that there are extremes at both ends. The other side went too far when they were in power. We need to resist the temptation to do the same...or their nightmares will become ours, as well.

Julia said...

The guy who wrote the article about the deep ignorance and vulgarity and dishonesty of Hollywood and how it's been taken over by Democrats, who are an "alien entity run by vulgar race hustlers and anti-Semites cloaked as "mere" anti-Zionists" who refused to write the movie the producer asked him to write was fired for his politics? Then they oppressed him by paying him for not doing the job he was hired to do?

How remarkably prescient his article on the subject was, then. I certainly hope lots of right-thinking foundations have given him money to salve the wound.

Rebecca said...

Um, just for the record, the comment above mine got posted while I was writing mine. I just wanted to make it clear that I am in no way in agreement with the sentiment that "...liberals ... lack substance in their argument."

I think we have way more substance than the conservatives ever had to base their heinous ways and opinions. In fact, yes, I think many of them - starting with Cheney and going down a very long list - are evil and deserve a special place in hell for the ways they have wreaked destruction upon this country and the world.

My point was, basically, we should use them as an example of what NOT to do. And, on the whole, I am glad to note that there are far fewer liberal assholes than conservative ones.

Ally said...

I'm with Rebecca here, John. I suspect our politics are pretty in-line, but.

I'm never very excited about people casting politics as an us-vs-them team sport. Reasonable people can disagree, and if I want people in a red state to respect my right to disagree, I have to respect the right of some guy here in town to - GASP! - vote Republican. And I have been in more than one room where industry people were pretty big dicks about the mildest of fiscal conservatives. It's NOT paranoid for a conservative to feel concern about being open about his or her political beliefs here.

John said...

A Republican calling someone out for "dragging your views out of the 1950s."

As a wise man once said, "it'd be funny if it weren't so pathetic."

Joshua James said...

""After the article was published I was fired from two screenwriting jobs. Both were pay or play deals. It's a measure of how deeply the producers despised me that they chose to pay off my full salary. In effect, paying me not to write.""

Lots of screenwriters are fired EVERY DAY and replaced in Hollywood - every day . . . and they ain't all Republicans (in fact, not many are) - we only have Averech's word that he was fired for the article, and even that is a stretch.

Trumbo was forced out due to his political views and HAD to write under another name, wasn't asked, HAD to . . . or leave the biz.

It's not an apt comparison. Not at all. Averich is trying to compare himself to someone in far different circumstances (the government came down on hollywood for hiring them) whereas Averich just has to deal with the fact he's written some silly, dickish things that some folks don't like and decide they'd rather work with someone else.

And guess what? It's unlikely Uwe Boll is gonna be hired to helm a Disney family film as well, but that doesn't mean NO ONE will hire him.

Averich could write for 24, for example, the creator of that show shares his views.

And there's a studio called Fox who, I've heard it mentioned, has an owner with decidedly conservative views.

Voight's still working, so he's not being descriminated against . . . the fact that some folks thinks he's an idiot and don't want to work with him hasn't seemed to hurt his career . . . because he's a good actor.

I mean, do you think Voight would be discriminating against Micheal Moore if Moore asked him to appear in a Moore movie and Voight refused?

Would that turn Moore into Trumbo?

I mean, come on! Please!

Kat said...

Speaking as someone who's voting for Obama (so no hurling of sharp pointy things) I find it repugnant how close-minded Hollywood is. I moved here from Florida, where people had opinions on both sides of the line and could speak freely, and have been shocked to see how people of differing viewpoints are treated in this city. (That goes for views on religion as well, don't get me started).

I definitely concede your point that the Blacklist is a far different beast than what is being experienced now, but to imply that it's just awkwardness at cocktail parties means you're missing what a lot of people are going through.

Speaking as a writer now, Hollywood needs to understand the half of the country that doesn't agree with them. That's a lot of people with varying motivations and reasons for voting and thinking the way they do, and they shouldn't be painted with one brush in the same way democrats shouldn't be.

Tim W. said...

So Kelsey Grammar, who's been on two massive hit shows and continues to get work at a prodigious rate and Jon Voight, who just in the last two years, has eight credits to his name and 30 in the last ten years are heading a conservative group who get bullied in Hollywood. Even if John Wells didn't hire Voight because of his politics, he might be able to get a little work from a guy name Bruckheimer who has been known to produce a few things.

Sure, there are people on both sides that are dickheads, but holding them up as the norm is hypocritical and smacks of a persecution complex.

By the way, is it really that shocking that the majority of artists in any city are liberal? I'd be worried if they weren't.

anonymousassistant said...

While Dalton Trumbo's situation is not the same, it strikes me that Klavan was exaggerating to make a point. You're kind of arguing with a straw man, here.

As for "occasional discomfort during cocktail party conversations," I realize that, as a producer, most of your friends and acquaintances own homes in which cocktail parties can be had.

I, however, live in a crappy apartment in the valley. I don't have a long track record of success, like Kelsey Grammer or Jon Voigt. I live hand-to-mouth on my six hundred dollar a week paycheck. I absolutely cannot afford to lose my job. It has been made very clear, on some shows, that I would lose my job if I spoke my mind.

And I don't have a pay-or-play deal.

I'm sorry if this make me "a self-pitying self-indulgent narcissist."

By the way, when's the next time you're going to write about writing? Or is this now a political blog?

(And I'm not just picking on you as a liberal; Craig Mazin had the same problem, during the strike.)

Christophe said...

Thank you.

My father (Ken Pettus, TV screenwriter) was blacklisted. For a man who fought for his country in WWII, it was hideous, and took a huge toll on him. To hear people complain that they are "blacklisted" in Hollywood for being on the right is an astonishing attempt at wrapping oneself up in victimhood.

Mike Cane said...

Christ. Will everyone grow the fuck up?

What people believe should not be a factor in their participation in the *marketplace*. Everyone has to buy food, pay rent/mortgage, etc, etc.

The Red Scare/Blacklist was a disgraceful event in this nation's history. Do people now go around doing it every day *personally*?

Keep up with this personal checklist shit and pretty soon *no one* will be able to earn any money because someone somewhere will disapprove, goddammit.

Writers: Just Effing SAY It!
Cogito Ergo Unsum

Julia said...

There's a particular Penthouse Letters quality to the standard I am a liberal but... concern trollage on this one. It doesn't seem as if Klavan's quite as alone as all that.

Dean Wormer said...

Well said, sir!

I've found many of the articles on the background of "An American Carol" to be similarly yell-inducing.

Zucker, Kelsey Grammar and everybody other conservative knucklehead involved on that project seem to be living under a sense of martyrdom.

It must be a nice security blanket to decide your career was fading not because of your lack of talent but because of some shadowy liberal conspiracy in Hollywood. But from my POV it looks pathetic.

Whiners.

GinaSmile said...

You are so amazingly funny. Your comments were lacking substance and were smug and arrogant. No wonder conservatives feel justified in believing blacklisting occurs. You are as closed minded as you claim they are.

Rebecca, Ally, Kat and Mike (and perhaps others by the time I post this) seemed willing to have an open mind…which I thought was the hallmark of a liberal.

No one specifically said they would be willing to work with a known conservative. No one offered proof that blacklisting of conservatives doesn’t happen. Saying that the 1950’s event was worse and thus not a valid comparison doesn’t disprove conservative blacklisting. Disparaging Mr. Avrich and pointing out Hollywood deals get dropped all the time doesn’t disprove it either. Saying Voight still works or can for Bruckheimer doesn’t do it either. (Incidentally, I didn’t use Voight as an example of blacklisting but rather Well’s comments about Voight as an example of a liberal’s reaction to a conservative. Most of your comments fit right in with Mr. Wells’).

I am not a Republican or conservative. I live off grid 46 - 48 weeks of the year (when I’m not visiting L.A., my parents or boyfriend). I generate my own electricity to run my water pump and computer. I use kerosene for light. I grow my own organic fruits and vegetables but love a good steak at The Palm. I stay at really fancy hotels when in LA. And my name's not Gina. ;)

I’ve sold 3 scripts (all living in development hell). I gave the money off the last one to a kids’ daycare center in town, a local environmental organization and my brother in college to pay off his tuition bill (even though he’s considering going into the military after he graduates). I go to networking events and parties when in LA. Maybe we’ve met? LoL

I just enjoy a good, intellectually honest debate. They are hard to come by. Most people don’t know what they are. (sigh)

Gotcha ya. ;)

mojotron said...

doesn't American Carol count as an affirmative-action project then?

Daiv@cruzio.com said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Richard Moon said...

Being annoyed at a Hollywood Conservative comparing himself to a guy who risked imprisonment for treason is no more or less open or closed minded than being annoyed at a Hollywood Liberal who spends all of 2004 going on and on about how they're going to move to Canada if Bush gets reelected.

Both are examples of ridiculously over-dramatized victimhood, and both do nothing more than trivialize the actual problems underlying the complaints.

Though, on that note? It's hard to be conservative in Hollywood? Try being a liberal in Country Music for a while.

richard moon said...

Also, from that article:

"TV also is too one-sided, he said. "They don't even make fun of Barack Obama," he noted. "How is that possible? The guy's hilarious.""

I bet Fred Armisen loves reading that.

It's comments like that that keep the "Hollywood is sooo mean to conservatives" people from getting taken as seriously as they should be. Right next to the idea that "there's absolutely no way a Republican can win" a state that elected Pete Wilson governor, and sent Ronald Reagan and Richard Nixon to the White House.

Julien St-Laurent said...

Well, I'm not a writer, nor do I work in Hollywood in any capacity. Heck, I'm not even american. But I do enjoy John's writing tremendously, so I'll just ask this:

What do conservatives in Hollywood want? Affirmative action? That the government step in and place restrictions on the producer's free market-based right to associate with whom he/she wishes? That conservatives in Hollywood be able to shed the responsibility and consequences of their opinions and belief?

It just seems to me that they are getting a serving of what they prescribe to everyone else, except it doesn't taste so good all of a sudden.

Kristi Wachter said...

I first learned about Alvah Bessie from an exhibit on the hungry i (the legendary nightclub). Bessie wrote screenplays for Warner Brothers for several years and was nominated for an Academy Award.

Like Trumbo, Bessie was imprisoned for refusing to name names. As Wikipedia says, he was never able to work in Hollywood again. An Oscar-nominated writer - finished. Instead of writing more great screenplays, he ran the soundboard at a nightclub.

A year in prison and a ruined career.

I don't think we have any real understanding of what that appalling witch hunt cost these people.


(I had the pleasure of meeting Abraham Polonsky at a screening of "Force of Evil" ... but that's a story for another time.)

Tim W. said...

Slightly different topic, but I do wonder, if Obama is elected, whether all those who felt it was traitorous to criticize the president, will still feel that way after January.

kirkspencer said...

"Just like a liberal--my blacklist is worse than your blacklist. "

Actually, yes. Your blacklist consists of some people saying they get thrown off jobs or can't get work. (Even though Voight has several jobs released every year, as does Grammar, both of whom you mention.)

In counter, the HUAC put people in prison for standing on their fifth amendment rights. The people got placed on the blacklist not merely for being or having ever been communists, but for associating with communists. I do not see spouses and friends of conservatives being blacklisted, and so far as I know nobody has gone to prison for refusing to say whether or not they're a Republican.

So yes, my blacklist is worse than your blacklist. The equivalency does not exist.

Gridlock said...

"Would you hire or work with a flaming conservative?"

I'd work with anyone, as long as they shut the fuck up and got on with their jobs.

Seeing well-paid, well-fed white guys bitching about being an oppressed minority afraid to speak up for their beliefs just highlights their ego, sense of martyrdom and complete lack of awareness of US history. Try being a muslim, or an atheist, or a black guy with a marijuana bust on your sheet that daddy's lawyer didn't get you out of.

Cunningham said...

"It's unlikely Uwe Boll is gonna be hired to helm a Disney family film as well, but that doesn't mean NO ONE will hire him."

No one ever has. He's financed all of his films himself thru Boll KG - his film fund he set up in Germany.

richard moon said...

@tim w.:
"Slightly different topic, but I do wonder, if Obama is elected, whether all those who felt it was traitorous to criticize the president, will still feel that way after January."


Most of them didn't feel that way while Clinton was in office, so there's already precedent for a sudden turnaround.

Josh Olson said...

Ginasmile wrote: “No one specifically said they would be willing to work with a known conservative. No one offered proof that blacklisting of conservatives doesn’t happen.”

Second part first - you can’t prove a negative. I can tell you this - I’ve been in the business in a wide variety of jobs for more than twenty years, the last ten as a screenwriter. I’ve met countless conservatives, and never seen anyone’s career damaged for having contrarian opinions. And in spite of the fact that I know countless conservative writers, executives and crew people, I’ve never come across anyone who will seriously maintain that their career has been hurt by it. And I’m enough of a loud mouthed asshole, that they’d go out of their way to make sure I heard about it.

Personally, I find the question of whether or not I’d work with conservatives to be about as offensive as asking whether or not I’d work with African Americans. I HAVE worked with conservatives, and will continue to do so. I owe a big part of my career to a very conservative studio exec, who was instrumental in me getting my first real agent, as well as in bringing me in to pitch for what turned out to be the most important writing assignment of my career. We will almost certainly work together again, and even if we don't, he will remain, more importantly, a friend.

To go beyond Ginasmile’s post - the Reporter article’s a joke. Grammer’s contention about veterans who keep their backgrounds to themselves only works if you’ve never been near a set. I’ve worked with crews for decades, and can’t remember having been on one that didn’t have its share of veterans. Worse, Grammer perpetrates the ugly lie that liberals hate the military. Fuck him and the horse he rode in on. If he cares so much about our soldiers, why isn’t he working to bring them home?

Which brings me to the next point - there ARE people in this business I won’t work with, and some of them are mentioned in this article. But it’s not their politics that offend me, it’s their despicable contention that if you oppose the current administration you hate America. David Zucker recently made a truly awful, unfunny “comedy” whose entire thesis was that if you criticize America, you support terrorists. I have nothing against Zucker for having politics I disagree with, but his contention falls very clearly into what we used to call in West Philly, “fighting words.” Some of the shit Grammer has said publicly has been equally loathsome. I wouldn’t work with or for either of those guys, ever. Not cos they’re conservatives, but because they’re repulsive liars who’ve accused all of us of hating our country.

What these whiners need to deal with is that this is a tough business for all of us. For a brief and ugly period, the views these jackoffs espoused had a foothold in the mainstream. Now that the American public has realized that Bush really IS the worst president we’ve had and that the war is a travesty, their views have become marginalized. Big fucking deal. Get over it, and get back to work, you goddam babies.

just me said...

If someone called me a Communist, I wouldn't care.

I'd be all, "yeah, I'm a commie. Want some of my lunch? We commies do that."

And I'm sure all would be forgiven, because like, I make good lunches.

Tim W. said...

Josh's post makes me think of Michele Bachmann's comment about a media probe to find anti-Americans in congress. The question that puzzlingly is never asked, is "What exactly would make them anti-American?". Personally, I wouldn't think anyone would go to the trouble of running for a high government position if they didn't love their country. Why exactly is Michael Moore believed by some to `hate America'? I'm a Canadian, myself, and have to say I don't understand this attitude in the least.

Anonymous said...

"Why exactly is Michael Moore believed by some to `hate America'? I'm a Canadian, myself, and have to say I don't understand this attitude in the least."

You have to dumb yourself down before that will make sense. Put your hands around your neck, and squeeze, squeeeeeeze ... there, now you're probably dumb enough to understand it.

Imagine your concept of loving your country is saying "My country rocks, wooooo!" With a well-thought-out world view like that, anyone who criticizes your country must hate it. You think I must be constructing a strawman caricature of that sort of "patriot", but I assure you I am not; I am calling a spade a spade.

And as for poor oppressed conservatives in Hollywood who don't feel they're getting enough respect ... if they are dumb enough to believe that Saddam Hussein personally flew both planes into the World Trade Center, AM radio hosts know more about the environment than climatologists, and Jesus rode around on a dinosaur, they deserve to be openly mocked.

Anonymous said...

Er, when I said "you're probably dumb enough to understand it", I probably should have said "you're probably oxygen-deprived enough". Didn't mean it as an insult, except perhaps to our simpleton right-wing countrymen.

qdpsteve said...

...if they are dumb enough to believe that Saddam Hussein personally flew both planes into the World Trade Center, AM radio hosts know more about the environment than climatologists, and Jesus rode around on a dinosaur, they deserve to be openly mocked.

'Anonymous' (i.e., coward), I'm a conservative and so are most of my friends. None of us believe any of those allegations, whatsoever. None. I'd bet most of the conservatives working in Hollywood don't either. (My experience is that most movie industry workers, across the board, above and below the line, have above-average IQ scores).

Since Josh Olson was so forceful about his successful conservative Hollywood collegues (as well as slapping down their BS), it'd be nice if he'd prove his mettle and condemn your bullshit as well. Josh, your move.

Dave Shepherd said...

As a non industry type, I have two observations:
1. Surely Libertas has taught us all about the temptation for some people to put "political discrimination" ahead of "lack of talent" as a reason for not breaking through.
2. There should be a variant on Godwin's law for the invoking of the term "blacklist". Feeling like a minority due to your opinions does not equal active persecution for those views.

Paul Stone said...

qdpsteve, you called Anonymous a coward for posting anonymously. I don't make any distinction between someone posting as 'Anonymous' and someone posting as 'qdpsteve'. You are both just as anonymous to me.

I didn't dig the name-calling, and I found it difficult to read through to whatever point you were trying to make.

Josh Olson said...

Qdpsteve,

“Since Josh Olson was so forceful about his successful conservative Hollywood collegues (as well as slapping down their BS), it'd be nice if he'd prove his mettle and condemn your bullshit as well.”

Um.... What bullshit? He indicated that people who believe criticizing your government is the same as hating your country are abject morons. That was pretty much the point of my post, as well.

I’d also agree with you that most of the conservatives working in Hollywood don’t believe that, either, as most conservatives working in Hollywood aren’t morons. I was pretty clear that my harsh comments were not directed at conservatives in general, but at liars and dolts specifically.

Lastly, I cannot speak to the courage or cowardice of "anonymous," but I WILL out him for you. His real name is PdqFrank.

Anonymous said...

Curses, I have been outed!

Okay, maybe you and yours don't actually believe that Saddam Hussein flew both planes, AM radio hosts know more than scientists, and Jesus rode dinosaurs. Those are only slightly exaggerated versions of the opinion on Hussein's role in 9/11, the questions about global warming that have been central to most conservative thought for over a decade now, and the doubt about evolution that flies in the face of medical advancement for over a hundred years now.

Shall we instead note the folly of supporting a party that preaches fiscal responsibility (yet manages to sink us into deeper and deeper debt), anti-terrorism (yet didn't act on the memos prior to 9/11), and the glories of laissez-faire capitalism (take a look at the mess that under-regulated banking is bringing us, same as it always has)? Or how about being on the team that has generally dismissed alternative energy as something to laugh at hippies over (because since we haven't run out of oil yet, we never will)?

I can understand and respect old-school conservatism, but what passes for conservatism today deserves less respect than the 9/11 Truthers. At least they have the ability and willingness to try to look at the facts and come to fact-based conclusions (even if they completely whiz it in the end).

qdpsteve said...

Wow! For my very first comment thread post here at KFM I got three more-reasonable-than-I-expected responses. Pleasantly surprised. Let's see here, and apologies in advance for the length:

Josh: thanks for responding, wasn't sure you would. The 'bullshit' is the stuff I quoted in my original post, which you yourself admit intelligent conservatives don't believe. That's all I was hoping you'd acknowledge. I didn't expect you to turn into Sean Hannity. (And I'd be disappointed if you did, as-- here's another shocker-- I'm a conservative who doesn't care for most of right-wing talk radio.)

Also Paul: you have a point, but I admit: Anonymous' first post made me angry. Right or wrong, I felt called a 'simpleton' by Anon's second post. I don't expect or demand everyone disagreeing with me to post their full name, SSN, address and e-mail, but it's nice when the strongly opinionated feature a backtrackable nom de net. Many times I've read something incendiary by a poster... but a look back at their earlier stuff revealed they were kidding, striking a pose, or just being uncharacteristically harsh once in a blue moon. Hey, it's the internet.

And as to Anon's follow up: still have a lot to disagree with but your 3:58am comment is still about 2000% better than your originals. Plus it goes well with Rogers' latest post.

I'm just relieved (so far at least) that Rogers ain't Jeffrey Wells and this place isn't Hollywood Elsewhere. Let's hope it stays that way. ;-)

Anonymous said...

Coming in late, but there's a point about the blacklist that should be noted.
The blacklist was not a case of a bunch of people like Trumbo being fired for their political views. It was a bunch of people being fired with the understanding among the Hollywood studios that nobody else would break ranks and hire them--otherwise, someone might have decided that John Garfield was worth the risk.
So far as I know, nobody in these anecdotes about conservatives claims an organized effort to keep anyone else from hiring them.
The blacklist was also huge numbers of people being fired not because of their politics but because they were alleged to associate with someone who might have said something that sounded to someone else like they were pro-red ... The for-profit vetting services Red Channels and Aware Inc. weren't required to do accurate research, their sole purpose was to alert networks and studios to anyone who might possibly be a "red," so a lot of people got smeared for false charges. Not that being blacklisted for legitimate charges would have been acceptable, but it's another reason the blacklist was such a blight.

Anonymous said...

зеленый лазер
электрошокер
товары мини камеры
товары народного потребления

Anonymous said...

THE PSEUDO-PATRIOTISM OF THE PSEUDO-CONSERVATIVES

One of the consequences of the switching of Jewish loyalties from the old Soviet Union to Israel has been the rise of revisionist anti-Communism. Revisionist anti-Communism is the digging out of the historical closet all the facts that show McCarthy, HUAC and the Permanent investigations Subcommittee of the Senate Judiciary Committee were right. Why is it now permissible to talk about facts that were denounced as “character assassination” decades ago? Some will say – it is the emergence of new information. New information there is, surely. But that is not the real explanation. The real explanation is that the Jewish agenda has changed. In the days of Jewish Communism Jews had to deny – at all costs – that there were any Communists in the government or Hollywood. Why? Because the Communists being exposed were overwhelmingly Jewish. Now that Communism has fallen and the state of Israel is the “only democracy in the Middle East”, the Jews have a different strategy. They wish to convince Americans that there is a great evil that threatens them – an evil called “Islamo-Fascism”. This evil represents an internal security threat – the same internal security threat that McCarthy was fighting! Therefore, resurrect McCarthy, pronounce “Islamo-Fascism” the new Communism and demonize anti-Zionist conservatives and pro-Palestinian liberals as the new Alger Hisses.

This is laughable beyond description when one considers that the American government, Hollywood and the media are permeated at all levels with Israel First Jewish traitors. It is hard to believe that any thinking mind could actually believe such nonsense. But the internet is full of websites and blogs taking this transparent propaganda seriously. If Americans had any historical knowledge they could not fall for such nonsense. Jews have always subscribed to two ideologies – Communism or Zionism (sometimes both). They have always been divided between the two ideologies. Joseph Stalin’s anti-Jewish campaign in the Soviet Union post-1950 and the rise of the state of Israel in 1948 caused a seismic shift in Jewish loyalties. Many of the new Jewish supporters of Israel retained their Marxist, extreme leftist politics; others were supporters of Vladimir Jabotinsky’s Revisionist Zionists (the ideological forebears of Israel’s Likud and America’s neo-conservatives). Now that the Jewish Communist past has been forgotten, the false patriots of neo-conservatism find it useful to resurrect the Senator they worked so hard to destroy.

Phentermine said...

The author is absolutely just, and there is no suspicion.