GAY MARRIAGE OPENS THE DOOR TO SHARIA IN AMERICA

Screenwriter Robert J. Avrech, who wrote the Devil Arithmetic movie in 2000, told the LA Jewish Journal that gay marriage and the political structure supporting it at all costs has given Islam an opening for polygamy:

In your recent piece for Jewish Action, the official magazine for the Orthodox Union, you claim Hollywood is executing “a brilliant, insidious stealth attack” on Jewish values and American culture. Is that because you would prefer Hollywood to foreground your own conservative values?

Robert Avrech: Obviously I would prefer that there be conservative values pushed in Hollywood movies, the way it used to be. But what’s happening now is that the values that are being pushed in Hollywood are pretty radical. There was a tremendous turning point in the culture when the sitcom “Friends” put on a lesbian marriage. And the redefinition of marriage is a radical idea, whether you agree with it or not.

To be fair, I'm not sure Hollywood pushed wholly conservative values in the yesteryear, because if you know where to look, there were movies and TV programs where the filmmakers made no secret of their preference for leftism over rightism. Granted, there was more respect for Judeo-Christianity back then, but the liberal bent they were so obsessed with upholding might have taken its toll as time went by.

You seem bothered by the preponderance of same-sex marriage in television and film.

I’m not really interested in gay marriage. I believe gays should get married if they want to get married. I have no problem with that. I want people to love each other. It’s the state intervention that bothers me, because then the state is going to have to involve itself in polygamy. One has to accept that when gay marriage becomes the law of the land in a majority of states. Then a Muslim is going to come forward with two wives, and he’s going to demand the right to marry his two wives. And once that happens, the door to Sharia in America is opened.

Yes, he has a point there. It's bad enough that mainstream TV and film have become so obsessed with featuring a predisposed view of homosexuality, and worse if politicians are going to go miles out of their way to persecute Christians and Judaists who oppose the belief system or just don't want to service it at the expense of their own faiths. Now, making this law of the land and forbidding Judeo-Christians the right to decline services is going to open the door to polygamy in the USA, with Muslims guaranteed to exploit every bit of it. Ironically, there's little or no chance Muslim homophobia will be opposed or even remotely condemned by propagandists like GLAAD

What values should Hollywood promote?

[My first choice] would be Hollywood admitting that the greatest danger to civilization itself right now is jihad and jihadists. Hollywood should confront that the way they confronted the Nazi threat and the imperial Japanese threat. [...]

In your article, you sound kind of peeved recalling a time when a studio hired you to write a script for a film (that ultimately didn’t get made) with the caveat: “Don’t malign all Muslims.” Isn’t that a reasonable request?

If you read the script, you would see that there were sympathetic Muslims within the movie. One of the characters was quite heroic, as a matter of fact. The problem is CAIR [the Council on American-Islamic Relations], which is a front for the Muslim Brotherhood. Their position is clear and unequivocal: No Muslim should ever be presented as a terrorist. Period. End of story.

Without a doubt, this was also a studio that was most kowtowing to such a vile organization. I don't know which one it was, but their modern MO makes it one studio that probably doesn't deserve any sane person's dollars.

CLOONEY AND HOLLYWOOD "PROUD TO BE OUT OF TOUCH" WITH THE TRUTH

George Clooney accepting his actor in a supporting role Oscar® for ‘Syriana’:

“Wow. All right, so I'm not a winning director… I would say that, you know, we are a little bit out of touch in Hollywood every once in a while. I think it's probably a good thing. We're the ones who talked about AIDS when it was just being whispered, and we talked about civil rights when it wasn't really popular. And we, you know, we bring up subjects. This Academy, this group of people gave Hattie McDaniel an Oscar in 1939 when blacks were still sitting in the backs of theaters. I'm proud to be a part of this Academy, proud to be part of this community, and proud to be out of touch.”

[More on CLOONEY here and HERE.]

POWERLINE:

The movie for which Clooney received an award, Syrianna, isn't out of touch with America because it is morally superior; it is out of touch because it is mind-numbingly dumb. A film that takes the position that suicide bombers are good, America is controlled by corrupt oilmen, and the United States is the force that stands in the way of Middle Eastern democracy, isn't just out of touch with America. It's out of touch with reality. Which probably explains, at least in part, why it was a dud.

KRAUTHAMMER:

The most pernicious element in the movie is the character who is at the moral heart of the film: the physically beautiful, modest, caring, generous Pakistani who becomes a beautiful, modest, caring, generous ... suicide bomber. In his final act, the Pure One, dressed in the purest white robes, takes his explosives-laden little motorboat head first into his target. It is a replay of the real-life boat that plunged into the USS Cole in 2000, killing 17 American sailors, except that in ``Syriana's'' version, the target is another symbol of American imperialism in the Persian Gulf -- a newly opened liquefied natural gas terminal....

I used to think that Hollywood had achieved its nadir with Oliver Stone's ``JFK,'' a film that taught a generation of Americans that President Kennedy was assassinated by the CIA and the FBI in collaboration with Lyndon Johnson. But at least it was for domestic consumption, an internal affair of only marginal interest to other countries. ``Syriana,'' however, is meant for export, carrying the most vicious and pernicious mendacities about America to a receptive world.

Most liberalism is angst- and guilt-ridden, seeing moral equivalence everywhere. ``Syriana'' is of a different species entirely -- a pathological variety that burns with the certainty of its malign anti-Americanism. Osama bin Laden could not have scripted this film with more conviction.

RELIAPUNDIT: (1) Clooney LIED when he made Murrow central to McCarthy's downfall. He obscurred the truth that Murrow was an anti-communist too - but one who didn't like McCarthy's tactics or style. (2) Clooney's LIED when he made the CIA agent he played in Syriana come under FBI investigation for being pro-Arab; in fact, Baer - the author of the book on which Syriana was ostensibly based, and the person Clooney's character was based on - was a hawk who wanted the USA to get tougher on the jihadoterrorists of Hizballah, not an appeasing dove.

These DELIBERATE LIES AND DISTORTIONS denigrate the USA and elevate the Left; they alter reality and serve the enemies of America.

That Clooney and Hollywood don't see it that way only proves how out of touch they are - NOT out of touch with the ignorant cretins of middle-America, but out of touch with reality, out of touch with any committment to tell the truth.

HEY CLOONEY: If reality and truth are antithetical to your politics, maybe you should change your politics, instead of LYING!? HEY CLOONEY: If you can't win an argument unless you lie, then maybe you're arguing the WRONG side of the controversy?!

UPDATE:

The idea that it is brave to stand up for gays in Hollywood, to stand up against Joe McCarthy in Hollywood (fifty years after his death), to say that rich white people are bad, that oil companies are evil -- this is nonsense.

All of these are mainstream ideas in Hollywood, always have been, always will be. For the people who made movies denouncing Big Oil, worshiping gays, mocking the rich to think of themselves as brave -- this is pathetic, childish narcissism. ...

Hollywood is above all about self: self-congratulation, self-promotion, and above all, self-protection. This is human and basic, but let's not kid ourselves. There is no greatness there in the Kodak theater. The greatness is on patrol in Kirkuk. The greatness lies unable to sleep worrying about her man in Mosul. The greatness sleeps at Arlington National Cemetery and lies waiting for death in VA Hospitals. God help us that we have sunk so low as to confuse foolish and petty boasting with the real courage that keeps this nation and the many fools in it alive and flourishing on national TV.

That's PURE GENIUS from Ben Stein. (Via DPGI)

HOLLYWOOD'S MOST RECENT FORAYS INTO POSTMODERNIST LEFTISM AND ITS CONCOMITANT ANTI-AMERICANISM

The first instance is a bit of a repeat - a new violent spy movie has come out and Hollywood and their leftist comrades at the NYTIMES/AP are touting it as the new anti-Bond. I guess they mean "new" because THE BOURNE ULTIMATUM is a month older. Here's how they pitch the new flick:

Owen Is the Anti - Bond in `Shoot `Em Up'

... [Clive] Owen, 42, plays Mr. Smith, an angry anti-hero who shoots every type of weapon in every way imaginable as he battles to protect a newborn baby from the bad guy, creepily and convincingly played by Paul Giamatti.

Owen's character is aided by a lactating prostitute (Monica Bellucci), with whom he shares a tenderly damaged love affair.

He has all the coolness of 007 -- a role Owen was once reportedly considered for -- but is as gritty and street-tough as an anti-Bond can get.

Damon and his director said the same crap and worse about Bond when they were promoting the latest Bourne movie.

WHAT'S WITH ALL THE BOND-BASHING?!

WHAT'S WRONG WITH BOND? HE'S A GOOD GUY! HE HAS ALWAYS DEFENDED US AND THE FREE WORLD!

(BTW: I don't care how leftist the movie is: IT HAS BELLUCCI IN IT (MORE OF HER HERE!), AND IS THEREFORE A MUST SEE.)

GATEWAY has another shocking instance of Hollywood collaboration with the enemy - SHOCKING EVEN BY HOLLYWOOD'S STANDARDS:

AHMADINEJAD Gives Oliver Stone Thumbs Up to Film Him!!

... Film director Oliver Stone, who has compared President Bush to Ahmadinejad, was not taking "no" for an answer this time. Director Stone reached out again to genocide-promoter Mahmoud Ahmadinejad last week to film his life story. ...

Fars News just reported that Iranian President Ahmadinejad has given Oliver Stone approval to film his biography:

"Stone’s publicist referred to the bad image that the U.S. media has given to Islam and Islamic countries and said that the documentary could assist in countering such negative propaganda.”

Would Hollywood've ever done a favorable bio-pic of Hitler in 1940!?!? NO WAY. At that time - Hollywood's Golden Age, Hollywood was run by 1st generation immigrants WHO LOVED AMERICA, and didn't take her for granted - or hate her.

This Stone movie is truly one of the all-time lows for the chic degenerati of H-wood. And that's saying a lot!

WHY HOLLYWOOD BECAME LESS PATRIOTIC

On March 9, 2005, Michael Medved posited that the reason Hollywood has become less patriotic is threefold: (1) Hollywood is more dependent on foreign income than ever; therefore they are pandering to foreigners; (2) Hollywood bought into the false idea (perpetrated by the Leftists who dominated - and still dominate the MSM) that the US military behaved badly in a bad and pointless war during Vietnam; because this false notion persists on the Left (ASIDE - yeah: FALSE! Vietnam was a noble cause, fought well - the SVG only fell a year after our withdrawal, and ONLY because the Democrats - who controlled Congress - stopped financing them) - and because the Left still dominates the MSM - anti-Military and anti-American themes still abound; (3) In the "good ol' days" (before Vietnam) Hollwood "players" were regular folk who had "made it"; today's Hollywood "players" are spoiled, insulated, and elitist; they are alienated from middle America - from "Red State" Americans.

I think Medved is right on the money, but also misses one KEY point: in Hollywood, during the GOLDEN ERA (when the greatest films were made, and most if-not-all were pro-America/pro-middle class values), the studios were run BY IMMIGRANTS. First generation IMMIGRANTS: people who had themselves fled tyrnanny - and the poverty and ingorance and hatred which tyrannies promote - and who had come to, AND WERE SAVED BY... AMERICA.

These studio moguls - Warner, Mayer and the rest - and also many of the greatest writer/director/producers, like Capra and Wilder and Kazan - did not take the American Dream for granted; America was not the object of their scorn; it was the object of their adoration.

It should still be.

It is NO COINCIDENCE that two of the most patriotic actor/producers in Hollywood are immigrants: Schwarzeneggar and Gibson (OKAY: Gibson was born here, but he was raisee in Australia!).

Apart from this omission, Medved's written a fine, short essay - RTWT.

BARACK OBAMA AND HOLLYWOOD

Quite a bit has been written about  the preponderance of Left-Leaning-Liberals in Hollywood - as if this  purported imbalance might explain the apparently high support for Barack Obama among Hollywood personalities, musicians etcetera.  I believe there might be other factors involved that have little to do with politics.  Let's face it - how much do these actors and musicians really know about Politics?!?  Most of the successful ones can't  even wipe their own ass nose without the assistance of  agents, managers and PA's.

If we examine this situation through the lens of SELF-MONITORING we may better understand the Hollywood love affair with Barack Obama, and with the Left.  Self-monitoring refers to the individuals self consciousness of his/her own appearance and behaviour in social situations.   Someone who has a high level of self-monitoring is aware of the signals being sent out by others and is adept at adjusting their own behaviour to "fit in".  Generally, actors have a extremely high level of self-monitoring. Politicians generally have a high level of self-monitoring. I think you would agree that Barack Obama, whose skill at adjusting his message to please his audience  would make a chameleon  turn yellow, is a high level self-monitor.  Hence the strong affinity of Hollywood actors for the actor-in-chief.

The general tendency for high self-monitors to seek social conscensus also explains the statistically small number of people in the Hollywood community who are brave enough to question the accepted beliefs in the community.  You might notice that those who do are successful enough to take that chance...and they may have a lower level of self-monitoring.

HOLLYWOOD BENDING OVER BACKWARDS TO HELP THE ENEMY

ATLAS: CAIR Goes Hollywood

As if Islamazis and leftards don't have enough of a choke hold on the media and entertainment industry. Every movie out of Hollywood on the war is so virulently anti American, it's hard to believe it's an American product.

FOX teamed up with unindicted co-conspirator and Hamas sympathizer, CAIR to teach how to make films (to inculcate I'm sure.)

From the CAIR alert:

(LOS ANGELES, CA, 10/8/07) - The Greater Los Angeles Area office of the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR-LA) and FOX Television recently co-hosted a "Hollywood 101" workshop and studio tour to introduce aspiring Muslim writers, directors and actors to the entertainment industry. The event, held at FOX Studios in Century City, was also designed to help promote a positive change in Hollywood's portrayal of Muslims and Arabs.

Those taking part in the event included students and entry-level professionals hoping to build contacts in the industry and seeking tips on advancing their careers.

WHY DOESN'T HOLLYWOOD REACH OUT TO RED AMERICA!?

Because they are postmodern Leftists on a Gramscian mission to demolish traditional Western culture and Judeo-Christian Civilization - which they blame for AGW, most of the world's genocide, and sexual repression (ie treating the embryo as a human, and homosexuality as a deviancy which should be tolerated but not aggrandized with special rights).

ALL OF THESE ARE DEMONSTRABLY FALSE: there is NO AGW; most of the world's genocide was committed by SOCIALISTS and JIHADISTS not Jews OR Christians OR Europeans; and life - a unique living human being with unique DNA - begions AT CONCEPTION.

THESE ARE THE FACTS.

The PLAIN AND SIMPLE TRUTH.

Something the postmodern Left CONVENIENTLY dismisses.

CLOONEY AND HOLLYWOOD: OUT OF TOUCH WITH HISTORY AND THE TRUTH

Noonan made many good points in her column about Clooney and Hollywood today, "Boy in a Bubble." Here's a key point - and where she went a little wrong - IMHO:

The Clooney generation in Hollywood is not writing and directing movies about life as if they've experienced it, with all its mysteries and complexity and variety. In an odd way they haven't experienced life; they've experienced media. Their films seem more an elaboration and meditation on media than an elaboration and meditation on life. This is how he could take such an unnuanced, unsophisticated, unknowing gloss on the 1950s and the McCarthy era. He just absorbed media about it. And that media itself came from certain assumptions and understandings, and myths.

Most Americans aren't leading media, they're leading lives. It would be nice to see a new respect in Hollywood for the lives they live.

YES: most of us lead REAL lives; most of us are not living in a Hollywood millionaire's bubble. BUT: I think that many MANY Americans are under-educated - ESPECIALLY about history. And I think that this makes them ESPECIALLY susceptible to Left-wing BS, and very PRONE to being swept up into facile explanatory templates - the type of thing that the Left seems to specialize in:

Bush knew about 9/11; Bush lied about WMD; Saddam and Bin Laden are products of American hegemony coming back to bite us; global-warming is man-made - and it's especially the fault of us over-consuming Americans - our greed and gluttony and selfishness; Big Oil is evil; and the overt reasons people do things are never the REAL reasons - to discover the REAL reasons you must see the conspiracies beneath the surface; and Israelis and Arabs are equally to blame for the violence in the Middle East. And so on...

I think that whether or not people lead REAL lives, or live in a bubble has NOTHING to do with whether they are suceptible to these LIES. I think EDUCATION - or lack thereof- does.

If MORE Americans knew history better then they wouldn't be at all suceptible to the propaganda people like Clooney churn out.

If they knew that McCarthy was finished BEFORE Murrow said "boo!", and if they knew that the CIA agent Bob Baer - who wrote the book which Syriana was based on - was a hawk who wanted us to get TOUGHER on Hizballah (IOW: THE OPPOSITE OF HOW CLOONEY CHOSE TO PORTRAY HIM!), and if they knew that Saddam was a client of the USSR, and if they knew that the MOSSAD assassinated the terrorists who murdered the Jewish Olympic atheletes they made future attacks less likely because (at the veryt least) these perps would NEVER attack again, and if they knew that and so much else... THEN THE SUPERFICIAL LEFTWING PROPAGANDA WHICH POSES AS ENTERTAINMENT WOULD DISAPPEAR ENTIRELY.

And guys like Clooney would stick to re-making movies about casino heists and sinking fishing boats, and guys like Moore would be out-of-business.

And Hollywood Box Office receipts would probably GO UP! HEY: It's a win-win!

MORE HERE.

US SOLDIERS IN EUROPE AND TURKEY ARE WARNED ABOUT A POSSIBLE VIOLENT BACKLASH FROM A NEW ANTI-AMERICAN MOVIE

The movie - "VALLEY OF THE WOLVES: IRAQ" - is blatantly anti-American, resembling a vile Iranian rant or an al Qaeda diatribe more than reality. As a result, the Pentagon has warned soliders that:

"... [this movie] has a number of scenes depicting US troops in Iraq in a poor light, showing them abusing prisoners, shooting innocent civilians and even being involved in the illegal trade of organs. ... Apart from recommending US troops stay away from cinemas where the movie is being screened, the order also stressed the military personal should “not to discuss the movie with anybody they do not know.” "

It co-stars Gary Busey and Billy Zane as evil Americans.

This movie - a Turkish movie - is sadly just one of long line of anti-American movies, nit just made by foreigners, but made by the Leftie doves of Hollywood - (this Turkish movie has 2 beens, but this applies to Hollywood's two major Leftie megastars Michael Moore and Clooney). These folks actually produce anti-American propaganda for the enemy, and then have the audacity to blame Bush for our nations bad PR image among foreigners, as if HE was the problem. He isn't; their euroleft-pandering, jihdoterrorist-pandering, back-stabbing self-loathing is.

NEED PROOF? I don't see anyone in Afghanistan, Iraq, Lebanon, Ukriane, or Georgia thanking Hollywood for their freedom and democracy. They ALL thank GEORGE BUSH and the USA.

Rightly so! By the Way: Can ANYONE imagine Hollywood producing anti-American propaganda during WW2!?!? And FDR INTERNED 50,000 citizens and was FIRE BOMBING civilian targets! But the Left supported him and the USA then. WONDER WHY? Well, I think for three reasons: (1) the studios were owned by 1st generation Americans who had themselves fled tyranny and LOVED America; (2) the Hollywood Left loved FDR - despite his excesses - (excesses which were WORSE than W's and the current Pentagon's) - because FDR was a socialist; and (3) in WW2, the USA was an ally of the USSR, and they LOVED the USSR.

If socialists Schroeder, and Putin, zuh chic frahnshman Jacques Chirac and the UN had suppported Bush's agggressive pro-democracy moves, then I am sure the Lefties in Hollywood would have, too. The Left feels that anything done by ANYONE on the Right - without the imprimatur of socialism - MUST BE FOR EVIL CORPORATIONS, or evil fundamentalist Christians (whom they also fear, and fear MORE than al Qaeda - except for "good" Christians like Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton and Jimmy Carter and Teddy Jo Kennedy and Genghis Kerry. What makes these "good" Christians? THEY SUPPORT ABORTION).

These Leftie propagandists are dupes and useful idiots. Their propaganda is a threat to our troops and the security of our nation. But a threat we can and will surmount.

MORE HERE AND HERE.

THE MYTH OF AMERICAN CULTURAL HEGEMONY - or - WHY SO-CALLED "AMERICAN CULTURE" PREVAILS

American culture prevails over other cultures because American culture is AD HOC.

AD HOC: "Something that is ad hoc or that is done on an ad hoc basis happens or is done only when the situation makes it necessary or desirable, rather than being arranged in advance or being part of a general plan."

American culture evolves in ways that are determined AD HOC by the people - not by the design of "the academy" or "the politburo" or "the Upper West Side" or "the chattering classes" or the "chic degenerati" or the elitist Left and the Old Media they dominate.

That's why American culture is an ever-evolving amalgam of the marketplace of ideas & products & services. The people - at any given time and place - determine for themselves what their culture is.

That's why American musical culture has gone from Brass Band to Big Band to Jazz Combo to Rock & Roll to Disco to Hip Hop - it's not the result of what some big-shots in some big offices decide. In America: "Culture happens!"

SO... when you hear leaders in other nations (or cultures) argue that they "want to prevent American Culture from overtaking their own" what they are really really proposing and doing is to prevent their people from reading & writing and listening & playing and filming & viewing and dressing or doing as they please. In effect, it is nothing more than fascism.

One of the favorite targets of culture elitists (who would prefer a system in which they themselves would pre-determine what YOUR culture "should be") is Hollywood - as if Hollywood movies were somehow uniquely American.

This is false, if not: absurd.

First of all, the Hollywood movie style was developed by trial & error in an effort to discover a way to manufacture a "moving picture story" that could be most widely distributed to a mass market comprised of disparate elements. To discover this style the studio moguls (themselves nearly all immigrants from various non-American cultures) hired talent from all over the world: Europe, Asia - everywhere; the who's who of early Hollywood is utterly international and multi-cultural. What this multi-cultural group was able to discover and perfect was a moving-picture story-style which was TRANS-CULTURAL and therefore "available" to audiences from any culture.

Further proof that this style is itself non-cultural is the fact that this style can be used to manufacture a moving-picture story in any language, and on just about any subject, with any political POV: elitist; subversive; anti-American; Marxist; porn; NAZI, etc.

So when you hear elitists (like Chirac) say that they want to put quotas on Hollywood movies to protect their own industry or their own culture from "American Cultural Hegemony" what they are really doing is preventing the people from deciding for themselves what they want to watch.

And this is the same attack on personal liberty when Chirac makes it against Hollywood, as when Bin Laden makes it against the West.

Neither wants the people themselves to decide for themselves what to: read or write; or play or listen to; or how to dress - or anything. They are both cultural elitists who think they know better what anybody should write or read or view or listen to; (YES: France has IMPOSED quotas on their radio-stations against too much "Anglo-music"). Neither trusts the people to decide for themselves.

If they had real confidence in their own culture, then they wouldn't fear competition with any other culture. They wouldn't have to ban the hijab on the one hand, or mandate the burkha on the other. They are - like all statists/elitists - birds of a feather.

The strength of American culture - so-called - is that it is FREE TO EVOLVE HOWEVER THE PEOPLE WANT IT TO EVOLVE. It absorbs whatever it wants from wherever it wants for as long as it wants - and "it" is the people, the "marketplace" if you prefer.

Within this ever-evolving culture, people are of course free to maintain enclaves of whatever they wish: they can be more devout & conservative (like 50's greasers, or Amish), or they can be xenophiles (like Woody Allen and Michael Moore and their fixation on the pre-eminence of French culture), or they can even be trekkies. This is because a FREE culture doesn't demand that everybody tows the line - heterogeneity and pluralism are fine in an open culture. That's why it evolves. America's culture is open-sourced and free; anti-American elitists are closed-minded and dictatorial.

And, that's why the LAND OF THE FREE is the home of world culture: because here the public determines what culture is (at any given moment) - and not members of the Academy or Mullahs or aristocrats of any stripe.

That's democracy of culture, and like democracy in the political realm: it only frightens tyrants. As well it should.

THE HEIGHTS OF HOLLYWOOD HYPOCRISY

Hollywood Favors High Tax, 'Gender Pay Equity' -- Just Not in Hollywood

Forbes compared the money paid to 2013's top 10 highest-paid male actors versus the top 10 highest-paid female performers. Not even close. The top 10 actresses made a total of $181 million. Their top 10 male counterparts made $465 million, which means the ladies made 39 percent of what the men raked in. "The top-earning actress, Angelina Jolie," wrote the Washington Examiner, "earned $33 million, roughly the same amount as the two lowest-ranked men." 

Where are the pitchforks? Why aren't actresses filing a class action lawsuit? After all, Obama signed the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act, which makes it easier for a plaintiff to claim wage discrimination. 

Where's the National Organization for Women? 

If 77 cents on the dollar compared to men is considered unfair, exploitative and unacceptable, 39 percent is practically involuntary servitude! But we see no Hollywood Boulevard street demonstration. We see "no display of unity" in front of Hollywood's famous Chinese Theatre, with hundreds of ticked-off actresses, linked arm-in-arm, led by Susan Sarandon, Meryl Streep and Whoopi Goldberg singing, "We shall overcome." Nothing. No picketing. Not even a flyer or two.
But the silence can be explained.

RTWT.

24's JOEL SURNOW

“America wants the war on terror fought by Jack Bauer. He’s a patriot.”

--Joel Surnow

I came across an interesting article by Jane Mayer entitled, Whatever it takes.

I learned some fascinating things but it wasn't hard to tell that Mayer is not a fan of 24 or of conservatives. Nevertheless, I found some excerpts worth sharing:

Surnow, for his part, revels in his minority status inside the left-leaning entertainment industry. “Conservatives are the new oppressed class,” he joked in his office. “Isn’t it bizarre that in Hollywood it’s easier to come out as gay than as conservative?” His success with “24,” he said, has protected him from the more righteous elements of the Hollywood establishment. “Right now, they have to be nice to me,” he said. “But if the show tanks I’m sure they’ll kill me.” He spoke of his new conservative comedy show as an even bigger risk than “24.” “I’ll be front and center on the new show,” he said, then joked, “I’m ruining my chances of ever working again in Hollywood.”

During three decades as a journeyman screenwriter, Surnow grew increasingly conservative. He “hated welfare,” which he saw as government handouts. Liberal courts also angered him. He loved Ronald Reagan’s “strength” and disdained Jimmy Carter’s “belief that people would be nice to us just because we were humane. That never works.” He said of Reagan, “I can hardly think of him without breaking into tears. I just felt Ronald Reagan was the father that this country needed. . . . He made me feel good that I was in his family.”

Surnow said that he found the Clinton years obnoxious. “Hollywood under Clinton—it was like he was their guy,” he said. “He was the yuppie, baby-boomer narcissist that all of Hollywood related to.” During those years, Surnow recalled, he had countless arguments with liberal colleagues, some of whom stopped speaking to him. “My feeling is that the liberals’ ideas are wrong,” he said. “But they think I’m evil.” Last year, he contributed two thousand dollars to the losing campaign of Pennsylvania’s hard-line Republican senator Rick Santorum, because he “liked his position on immigration.”

His favorite bumper sticker, he said, is “Except for Ending Slavery, Fascism, Nazism & Communism, War Has Never Solved Anything.”

A year and a half ago, Surnow and Manny Coto, a “24” writer with similar political views, talked about starting a conservative television network. “There’s a gay network, a black network—there should be a conservative network,” Surnow told me. But as he and Coto explored the idea they realized that “we weren’t distribution guys—we were content guys.” Instead, the men developed “The Half Hour News Hour,” the conservative satire show.

“‘The Daily Show’ tips left,” Surnow said. “So we thought, Let’s do one that tips right.” Jon Stewart’s program appears on Comedy Central, an entertainment channel. But, after Surnow got Rush Limbaugh to introduce him to Roger Ailes, Fox News agreed to air two episodes. The program, which will follow the fake-news format popularized by “Saturday Night Live,” will be written by conservative humorists, including Sandy Frank and Ned Rice.

Surnow said of the show, “There are so many targets, from global warming to banning tag on the playground. There’s a lot of low-hanging fruit.”

I for one am looking forward to Surnow's new show, "The Half Hour News Hour".
[MORE ON THAT SHOW HERE.]

OBAMA, RAHM AND HOLLYWOOD

• HOLLYWOOD HAS LONG BEEN IN-THE-BAG FOR OBAMA.

• RECENTLY, THE HOLLYWOOD LEFT MADE A VIDEO ENDORSING OBAMA'S PRESIDENCY AND CALLING FOR THE NATION TO COME TOGETHER. "THE PRESIDENTIAL PLEDGE".

• HOW CONVENIENT: NOW THAT THERE'S A LEFTIE IN THE OVAL OFFICE THEY WANT THE NATON TO PULL BEHIND THE POTUS.

• (I'LL PASS. I WILL GIVE OBAMA HELL. AFTER ALL: DISSENT IS TRUE PATRIOTISM! HEH!)

CYNICAL QUESTION OF THE DAY:

COULD ANY OF THIS HAVE TO DO WITH THE FACT THAT RAHM EMANUEL - (EARLY OBAMA ENDORSER, A CO-MEMBER OF THE CHICAGO MACHINE, AND OBAMA'S COS DESIGNEE) - HAS A BROTHER WHO IS ONE OF HOLLYWOOD'S BIGGEST AND MOST POWERFUL AGENT!?

ER UM... MICHAEL MOORE'S AGENT!

• I THINK IT DOES.

• I BETCHYA BEFORE THE PRIMARIES BEGAN, RAHM HAD HIS BRO' ARI CALL IN SOME CHITS AND GET AS MANY HOLLYWOOD HEAVYWEIGHTS TO ENDORSE OBAMA - NOT HILLARY.

HERE'RE 2 MORE REASONS WHY HOLLYWOOD IS TO BE DESPISED AND WALMART REVERED

ITEM #1:  HOLLYWOOD PANDERS TO CHINA'S TYRANTS

To Get Movies Into China, Hollywood Gives Censors a Preview

When “Kung Fu Panda 3” kicks its way into China’s theaters in 2016, the country’s vigilant film censors will find no nasty surprises.

After all, they have already dropped in to monitor the movie at the DreamWorks Animation campus here. And the story line, production art and other creative elements have met their approval. The lure of access to China’s fast-growing film market — now the world’s second largest, behind that of the United States — is entangling studios and moviemakers with the state censors of a country in which American notions of free expression simply do not apply.

ITEM #2 - WALMART - WHICH LIBS'N LEFTIES REVILE:

Wal-Mart Plans to Hire Any Veteran Who Wants a Job

Wal-Mart, the nation’s largest retailer, will announce Tuesday a plan to hire every veteran who wants a job, provided that the veterans have left the military in the previous year and did not receive a dishonorable discharge. The announcement, to be made in a speech in New York by William S. Simon, the president and chief executive of Wal-Mart U.S., represents among the largest hiring commitments for veterans in history. 

Company officials said they believe the program, which will officially begin on Memorial Day — May 27 this year — will lead to the hiring of more than 100,000 people in the next five years, the length of the commitment.

WHICH REALLY DESERVES RESPECT HOLLYWOOD OR WALMART?

WALMART!

THIS BEHAVIOR BY HOLLYWOOD - (WHO ARE ALONG WITH GOVERNMENT UNIONS, UNIONS, GAYS, BLACKS, HISPANICS AND TRIAL LAWYERS A KEY PART OF THE DEMOCRAT COALITION) - IS JUST MORE PROOF THAT THE LEFT IS UNPRINCIPLED AND ONLY CARES ABOUT ATTAINING AND MAINTAINING POWER IN ORDER TO HAND OUT GOODIES TO MEMBERS OF ITS COALITION.

TAXPAYER-FUNDED/UAW-OWNED GM IS DOING MUCH THE SAME THING IN CHINA, AS IS GOOGLE AND APPLE.

IF YOU VOTE DEMOCRAT, THEN YOU ARE TACITLY SUPPORTING THIS.

SHAME ON YOU.

WAKE UP.

STOP VOTING WITH YOUR PARTISANSHIP AND START VOTING WITH YOUR HEAD AND HEART!

THE ASTUTE BLOGGERS WEEKLY R&R REVIEW - week #3

There's more to life than war, taxes and politics - and a lot of it's more fun, too! That's why every WEEKEND, here at THE ASTUTE BLOGGERS, we post our opinions on some of the cultural things we're into, things we think you might also find entertaining, enriching, and stimulating. Good for "Rest & Relaxation" - "R&R".

Please check it out every week - and tell your friends. We just might turn you on to something cool. After all, the arts - ALL ARTS, not just fine arts - are a big part of what our liberty is for, and what we're fighting to defend!

Reliapundit: THE REVOLT

This is a memoir of the liberation of Palestine from imperial British rule and it's ascension to independent Jewish statehood by the brilliant and brave leader of the Irgun - Menachem Begin, (who later became president of Israel and the man who made peace with Egypt). The beginning of the book is especially significant - in terms of contemporary headlines, and because of the stories of Begin's time in Soviet concentration camps: these stories are heart-breaking and incredibly inspiring. And they're why I think everyone should read this book. Begin's rendering of this early part of his sojourn truly reveals the ineffable heart and soul of Zionism. (I will try to post an incredible excerpt later.) Begin dedicates this book - more or less - to a new creature born in the era following WW2 and during the war for Israeli independence - the fighting Jew. May this creature never disappear from the face of the Earth.

Gormless Norm' - PECKINPAH!

There's been a conspicuous absence of pro-American movies during the current war. What do we see instead? In Flightplan early on we suspect that Middle Eastern-looking men are the bad guys; when they're not, we're supposed to feel guilty for this. Syriana weaves a vague and silly Michael Moore plot which is best summed up simply as "U.S., boooo!" I got excited when I saw the first previews for Kingdom of Heaven. That lasted about 10 minutes, until I found out the movie was about noble Muslims defending the Holy Land from the crude, boorish, evil Christian crusaders, along with an absurd Rainbow Coalition that never existed in history. But it should have, according to Hollywood. Well, at least it got good reviews from Muslims. Everybody was happy under Islam. This is what Hollywood gives us. Compare this with Hollywood's contribution during WWII. Clearly, Hollywood needs to be drafted.

I liked the remake of Walking Tall they made with the Rock. Guy comes back from the war, things in his town are rotten, he picks up a 2X4 and cleans things up. We need more like that, but even more on point. As long as Hollywood doesn't seem capable of writing anything original anymore, here's the one film I would love for them to remake: Sam Pekinpah's Straw Dogs. Pekinpah has a reputation for making violent films, and this one is no exception. In fact, it is probably more violent than Wild Bunch, and more to the point it perfectly captures Pekinpah's philosophy of violence, as in, it's part of the world, and sometimes you have to resort to it. For anyone reading this blog, I don't need to explain how the various events in the movie are redolent in our current situation, and according the the views that most of us share. Simply, if you haven't seen it, go get it right now, and you will thank me.

Pauline Kael of the NYT called it a "fascist" movie. Pauline Kael is the person who expressed shock that Nixon had won, because "everyone she knew" voted for McGovern. Ha ha. Pauline Kael would probably be among the legions who call LGF "fascist." I think that's enough said. Just rent it, I'm not even going to give away anything about the plot. It has Dustin Hoffman. It's brilliant and has the best tension-build up ever, exploding in violence in the end. It's among my all-time top movies. The DVD is available in the Criteron collection. Oh yes, don't rent from Blockbuster, it will be the R version, make sure you get the unrated or original version.

Pastorius: What do you get when you mix the Who, MC5 and Aretha Franklin? You get one of the most rockin' bands of our time: The Bellrays:



Popinjay: De-Phazz

The past couple of years, I've really gotten into Trip-Hop which is a electronica or downtempo music that is a combination of jazz, soul, funk, hip-hop and whatever else you want to throw in the stew-pot. Thievery Corporation, Massive Attack, Zero 7 are just a few examples.

Recently, I've been listening to the De-Phazz album Death By Chocolate which features an outstanding track called "Online" that has some poignent lyrics for us Blogger types:

Well you've got to meet me online
Been disconnected for a long time
Well you've got to meet me online
I wanna download you for a lifetime

Reliapundit: Until next time: have fun: enjoy the things the enemy wants to outlaw.

HOLLYWOOD STUDIOS BANKROLLING ANTI-AMERICAN PROPAGANDA

LIFELIKE PUNDITS has excerpted and linked to an astounding list of ANTI-AMERICAN movies green-lighted by the Hollywood studios for big production bucks and big marketing budgets and big WORLDWIDE rollouts - which was over at TOWNHALL in a column by JASON APUZZO (of LIBERTAS) .Read the whole list and each movie's plot-line; they will astound you with their blatant anti-Americanism and knee-jerk/tin-foil hat Leftism.

These TEN movies do several things contemporary Hollywood loves to do: pander to the Leftists who feel that America and America's corporations are the chief instigators of evil in the world; pander to export markets in countries that feel the same way about America; and pander to low-brow conspiracy theory-buffs who feel the same way, too.

These kind of movies were ALMOST NEVER made when Hollywood was run by FIRST GENERATION IMMIGRANTS WHO LOVED AMERICA AND BELIEVED IN THE AMERICAN DREAM. The only anti-American movies made during the HEYDAY of Hollywood were made by card-carrying/cell-attending Communists who were DELIBERATELY writing and starring in and producing anti-capitalist and pro-USSR movies in order to fertilize America for communism. And I use the word FERTILIZE advisedly!

SONY'S POLITICIZATION OF UPCOMING BIN LADEN RAID FILM DISCOURAGES AUDIENCE

After it became known that Sony's planned movie project to be based on the raid on bin Laden's hideout in Pakistan would actually be more like a reelection prop for Obama, Big Hollywood ran a poll, and the results show that a solid number so far - 98 percent - are discouraged from seeing Katheryn Bigelow's movie because of how it could be less a straightforward focus and more of a political election maneuver.

I think it's worth arguing that these kind of dispiriting turn of events aren't too surprising. It brings to mind how, as a comics reader who's been alienated from much of the output of both Marvel and DC comics because of some of the most horrific editorial mandates and politicizations of their own material they've been making in the past decade, that's why I was discouraged from reading anything more positive they might have done, and still am. In fact, it's worth noting that some of the not too many conservatives allowed to work in the wider field aren't much better than their liberal counterparts: Bill Willingham, for example, may have made Fables into a pro-Israel metaphor, but the problem is: if you're someone who finds misogyny in showbiz a concern, you wouldn't be happy to know that Willingham, willfully or not, lent himself to a couple such steps DC did during 2004-05, and then, when people voiced their offense at one of his steps, he took to insulting them, rather rudely too, I might add. It was as though he was mocking the audience, and I think it goes without saying that's hardly at all a way to maintain one's audience.

Later on, he wrote a piece about "superhero decadence" on Big Hollywood at the time it was just starting out, where he verified his conservative stance, but not only does it not excuse his prior behavior, I personally just couldn't bring myself to congratulate him. His actions from several years ago struck me as so jaw-droppingly vulgar, how was I supposed to just congratulate him now? It makes no difference if he wrote those stories at the behest of the editors; after he insulted his own audience - something I don't think he's ever actually apologized for - it's hardly helping to tell everyone he's written a story where Robin helps on a mission to Afghanistan when he's done something else that runs contrary to common sense. And it sure didn't bring him much audience afterwards either.

There's a lesson to be learned both ways here - on the one hand, when you turn what could be a powerhouse film project about the raid on bin Laden's hideout into a politcized project, or on the other, if, as a conservative, you do something that's offensive and contradictory to what most conservatives would stand for, there's every chance that even conservatives will be alienated. If my offended reaction to Willingham's terrible behavior from 2004-05, and the Big Hollywood audience's reaction to the news on how the Pakistan raid movie project's being handled, is any indication, then yes, there are conservatives out there who aren't just going to overlook past mistakes when it's more likely there's a case at hand of scoundrels using patriotism as their last refuge. Sometimes, these kind of people really know how to sabotage potentially good ideas and make it impossible to appreciate them, even when there's good intentions at hand.

The news of Sony's politicization has led to a call for investigation by Rep. Peter King:

New York Republican Rep. Peter King sent a letter Tuesday to Defense Department Inspector General Gordon Heddell and CIA Inspector General David Buckley, expressing his concern about declassifying sensitive information for pure entertainment.

“The administration’s first duty in declassifying material is to provide full reporting to Congress and the American people, in an effort to build public trust through transparency of government,” he wrote. “In contrast, this alleged collaboration belies a desire of transparency in favor of a cinematographic view of history.”

In his letter, Rep. King noted that the mission was successful because it was extremely covert, and that providing “high-level access” to a Hollywood filmmaker runs contrary to that effort.

There probably is a valid argument here that it isn't proper to just give away classified info for the sake of making a movie.

BUDD SCHULBERG CROSSES OVER TO THE OTHER SIDE...

Budd Schulberg, Screenwriter, Dies at 95

Budd Schulberg, who wrote the award-winning screenplay for “On the Waterfront” and created a classic American archetype of naked ambition, Sammy Glick, in his novel “What Makes Sammy Run?,” died on Wednesday.

He was 95 and lived in the Brookside section of Westhampton Beach, N.Y.

... Mr. Schulberg also wrote journalism, short stories, novels and biographies. He collaborated with F. Scott Fitzgerald, arrested the Nazi filmmaker Leni Riefenstahl and named names before a Communist-hunting Congressional committee. But he was best known for writing some of the most famous lines in the history of the movies.

Some were delivered by Marlon Brando playing the longshoreman Terry Malloy in the 1954 film “On the Waterfront.” Malloy had lost a shot at a prizefighting title by taking a fall for easy money.

“I coulda been a contender,” Malloy tells his brother, Charley (Rod Steiger). “I coulda been somebody. Instead of a bum, which is what I am.”

The script, which won one of eight Oscars awarded to the film, bears echoes of Mr. Schulberg’s own political struggle: the film’s director, Elia Kazan, had also chosen to name names.

At one point Father Barry encourages the dockworkers to testify against the mob. In America, he says, there are “ways of fighting back.”

“Getting the facts to the public,” the priest continues. “Testifying for what is right against what is wrong. What’s ratting to them is telling the truth for you. Can’t you see that?”

Mr. Schulberg ... joined the Communist Party of the United States after he returned to Hollywood. “It didn’t take a genius to tell you that something was vitally wrong with the country,” he said in the 2006 interview, recalling his decision to join the party.

“The unemployment was all around us,” he said. “The bread lines and the apple sellers. I couldn’t help comparing that with my own family’s status, with my father; at one point he was making $11,000 a week. And I felt a shameful contrast between the haves and the have-nots very early.”

His romance with Communism ended six years later, when he quit the party after feeling pressure to bend his writing to fit its doctrines.

Mr. Schulberg had been identified as a party member in testimony before the House committee. Called to testify, he publicly named eight other Hollywood figures as members, including the screenwriter Ring Lardner Jr. and the director Herbert Biberman.

They were two among the Hollywood 10 — witnesses who said the First Amendment gave them the right to think as they pleased and keep their silence before the committee. All were blacklisted and convicted of contempt of Congress. Losing their livelihoods, Lardner served a year in prison and Biberman six months.

In the turmoil of the Red Scare, Mr. Schulberg’s testimony was seen as a betrayal by many, an act of principle by others. The liberal consensus in Hollywood was that Lardner had acquitted himself more gracefully before the committee when asked if he had been a Communist: “I could answer it, but if I did, I would hate myself in the morning.”

In the 2006 interview... he said he had named names because the party represented a real threat to freedom of speech.

“They say that you testified against your friends, but once they supported the party against me, even though I did have some personal attachments, they were really no longer my friends,” he said. “And I felt that if they cared about real freedom of speech, they should have stood up for me when I was fighting the party.”

... After their joint success with “On the Waterfront,” Mr. Schulberg wrote and Mr. Kazan directed “A Face in the Crowd” (1957), one of the first films to weigh the political clout of television. Based on a Schulberg short story, the film depicts the transformation of a country singer, played by Andy Griffith, from power-drunk star into populist demagogue.

... “I’d like to be remembered as someone who used their ability as a novelist or as a dramatist to say the things he felt needed to be said about the society” while being “as entertaining as possible,” he said in the 2006 interview.

“Because if you don’t” entertain, he said, “nobody’s listening.”

A GREAT WRITER. ENTERTAINING. PRO-SOCIAL. TRUTHFUL.

AND WHEN HE AND KAZAN "RATTED" ON THE COMMIES THEY WERE DOING THE RIGHT THING.

RIP, BABY!

CONDOLENCES TO THE WHOLE SCHULBERG CLAN.

Why Leftist Ideology Fails

Excerpt:

Why isn't there a single example of a successful `People's Paradise'? How is it that the best of intentioned revolutionaries was never able to produce a single, sustainable and functional society? Why is it that societies that espouse economic equality and predicated on well meaning ideals, either secular or religious, have proved to be abject failures?

Leftists mistakenly believe that a collective `unity' of belief, thought and ideology empower a society. Their strength, they believe, are in the numbers of those who share their ideologies. Leftist believe that they have every right to design a society based on what they believe is in the best interest of that society. They also believe that an unwillingness to conform to their ideals, poses a threat, and quite possibly, a danger.

For example, those state that embrace various leftist ideologies, take a dim view of anyone or group that might demand lower taxes, or changes in the state welfare benefits. Millions of Frenchmen turned out to protest an employers right to fire them from their jobs- even if their job performance was sub par. The upcoming French election is no small measure revolves around that nation's stagnant economy and what painful changes will be needed to revive and repair that economy from the deep damage socialism has inflicted. Where the Socialist Segolene Royal and right of center candidate Nikolas Sarkoszy differ is in the method and approach to change, not on the need for change.

Leftists naturally see themselves as `progressive.' They believe their way of viewing the world is an improvement over the `old way.' The idea of hard work for greater personal gain an dsatisfaction, for example, is passe, and in their eyes, destructive, racist and representative of `colonialist' thought. Personal gain is selfish and narcissistic.

It is interesting to note how `progressives' have aligned themselves with Hollywood types- some of the most narcissistic and self centered group of people on the planet. These same Hollywood types, venerated by leftists, are also among the most removed from the real world, believing themselves to be a kind of aristocracy, entitled to material things that only they are entitled. There is much truth to the old saying. `You are known by the company you keep.' The `progressives' have made clear their attachment to the phony aristocracy of Hollywood trumps the relationship they might have with the rest of us, `the little people.'

Of course, the attachment of the left to Hollywood pales is no more than simple hypocrisy. The attachment the left has to every dysfunctional, racist and bigoted regime and leader is indicative of a far more dangerous pathology. When leftists speak of `freedom' and `progressiveness,' they do so standing on the corpses of millions, as they toast the leaders of regimes that have authored the slaughter of millions. As long as the leftist is feted and honored, the sins of the devil himself can be washed away.

It is the progressives that want to present their own versions of history, religion and ideologies- versions that only serve to endorse their views and their hypocrisies. Disagree with them and the fierce and frenzied wrath of the ideologues descends. No room for anything but group think.

In reality, the `progressives' are actually regressive. It is because of their single minded, lockstep thinking that we find ourselves in some of the messes that have engulfed us. They believe in the `my way or the highway' kind of thinking. Disagree with them and the world is coming to an end. The vitriol and visceral hatred directed of the current administration is a good example. No difference of opinion will be tolerated. Disagree and the well oiled machine of personal destruction comes out. The shameful display of that truth was evident during the confirmation hearings of Samuel Alito. It mattered little that Quran desecration story was untrue. The vitriol was released nonetheless.

Over the decades, tens, if not hundreds of millions have died because of `my way or the highway' ideologies. Disagree with the powers that be or want to be, and there are calls of, "Death to." Disagree loud enough and you are marked for death. We all got a taste of that as the cartoon riots unfolded. It was `my way or the highway' unleashed on democratic societies. It was my way or the highway in the Soviet Union, Cambodia, Vietnam and in regimes in the Middle East. Antisemitism, virtually unknown in Venezuela, has reappeared simultaneously with the advent of Hugo Chavez.

`My way or the highway' is a nothing more than a regression to a more barbaric time, when disputes, disagreements and different ideas were settled only when blood was spilled. That is a derivative of `my way or the highway.' Mankind evolved and advanced when societies came to tolerate those with different ideas and beliefs. We advanced because we allowed each of us to exercise the freedom and the opportunity to achieve whatever it was we were capable of, in any endeavor we chose. No one told us what to do, what to think or what to invent.

Source

(For more postings from me, see TONGUE-TIED, EDUCATION WATCH, GREENIE WATCH, POLITICAL CORRECTNESS WATCH, FOOD & HEALTH SKEPTIC, GUN WATCH, SOCIALIZED MEDICINE, AUSTRALIAN POLITICS, DISSECTING LEFTISM, IMMIGRATION WATCH and EYE ON BRITAIN. My Home Pages are here or here or here. Email me (John Ray) here.)

DEMOCRAT SENT OUT LETTER PRAISING HOLOCAUST DENIER

A very disgusting revelation about Democrat Marcy Kaptur:

Democratic Ohio Rep. Marcy Kaptur sent and signed a letter expressing admiration for infamous Holocaust denier David Cole’s documentary doubting the use of gas chambers at Auschwitz.

The letter, flagged by citizen Kenneth Ceron and provided to The Daily Caller, showed that Kaptur wrote to Oregon-based Holocaust denier Gregg Klemmer on official congressional stationery on January 16, 1995 thanking Klemmer for sending her and other congressmen a copy of David Cole’s 1992 documentary “David Cole Interviews Dr. Franciszek Piper: A Jewish Researcher’s Honest Look at WWII and Auschwitz.”

“Dear Mr. Clemmer: Thank you for sending me a copy of David Cole’s video,” Kaptur wrote. “Mr. Cole has obviously invested a great deal in researching his subject and I admire his tenacious curiosity. Again, I thank you for sharing this documentary with myself and other Members of Congress.”

David Cole appeared on Phil Donahue’s television show in 1994 to defend fellow Holocaust denier Bradley Smith’s assertion that there is “no proof whatever of homicidal gassing chambers, and no proof that even one individual was ‘gassed’ in a German program of ‘genocide.’” Cole also appeared on the Montel Williams Show as a member of the Committee for Open Debate on the Holocaust, where he was introduced as a Holocaust “revisionist.” Cole said on 60 Minutes that “the evidence saying that there were no gas chambers is a lot stronger than any of the evidence that can be presented saying there were.”

Cole later decided to retreat from his life as a public Holocaust denier. Cole changed his name in 1998 to “David Stein” and moved to Hollywood, where made a living by making non-”revisionist” Holocaust documentaries, saying, ”I gave mainstream audiences what they wanted.” Cole also became a conservative Hollywood social gadfly, though his Hollywood conservative friends did not know his secret former identity.

Stein was exposed as David Cole in 2013, and told The Guardian that he still doubted official historical details about gas chambers. The imdb page for “David Stein” claims that he received “commendations” from Kaptur and others.

An advertisement from the Committee for Open Debate on the Holocaust cited Kaptur’s praise for Cole’s documentary. The advertisement offered $250,000 to anyone who could arrange a primetime national television debate between Holocaust denier Bradley Smith and the Anti-Defamation League.

At least two repellent people have a lot of explaining to do, and should both be ostracized by sane society. It doesn't surprise me people like Cole pretend to be "conservatives". Clearly, doing what they could to smear right-wingers' reputations is something they set out to do from the start.

Rep. Kaptur has reportedly become less visibly anti-Israel during her congressional career. The liberal publication Talking Points Memo recently wrote that ”those members of Congress who represent areas with large Arab communities (Bill Pascrell, Marcy Kaptur, and John Dingell, to name a few) have increasingly over the years had to temper the decibel of their advocacy on any issue that runs afoul of AIPAC.” Kaptur even slammed her 2012 Republican opponent “Joe The Plumber” for associating gun control with the Holocaust in a campaign ad.

Oh, I can tell why she became less noticeably anti-Israel. It doesn't make for good PR, so she saves it until after she's been elected to office. She even had the gall to attack Joe Wurzelbacher for supporting self-defense rights, and should be disqualified from politics altogether just like Cole should be thrown out of Hollywood.

HOLLYWOOD LIBERALS

There is a reason why Laura Ingraham titled her book "Shut-up and Sing". The message was Barbara Streisand can sing but when it comes to politics she doesn't know what she's talking about so she just needs to shut-up!! I think this applies to most of the people in Hollywood. A lot of them can act/sing thats why they are famous but they don't have a clue when it comes to having a competent opinion on politics or current events. There are exceptions on both sides of the aisle i.e. Dennis Miller on the right and Ben Affleck on the left but for the most part this is true.

I'm a TV/movie person so if I like someone its almost better if I don't know much about their personal, political views. Goldie Hawn and Drew Barrymore are 2 of my favorite actresses but they are both complete airheads. Hawn lobbied for some bill against being cruel to circus elephants (which was absurd in and of itself) and she was asking people to contact their representatives. When asked who her representative was and had she contacted him/her she didn't even know who her representative was, sigh... Drew Barrymore did some ridiculous video tour trying to find out what politicians could do for her (a millionaire) and was upset when even Hillary Clinton wouldn't allow her to follow her around. I had to stop watching because I was so astounded at how shallow she was.

All of this leads to me watching O'Reilly and his people interview some of the Hollywood anti-war protesters. I could not believe how pathetic they were. When Fonda was told that 3 million Vietnamese died when we pulled out and was she worried about the Iraqis if we cut and ran, she had no answer. When Robbins was asked how we should stop Iran from developing nuclear weapons he just made some sarcastic answer about how it wouldn't be by bombing them. To top it off O'Reilly himself interviewed Whoopi Goldberg last night and said she had a right to her opinions but she needed to back them up. Her answer basically was that this was how she FELT and she didn't need to back up her opinions with fact. O'Reilly brought up a great point about how what if your opinion would put people in danger.

It must be nice to be a Hollywood liberal. You have fame so people pretend to care about your opinion so you get to share how you FEEL about life-altering events but you don't have to back them up with any facts.