I think those of us who are gay conservatives can certainly relate to the “coming out” process that a conservative in Hollywood must have to go through.
Robert Averch, a screenwriter in the film industry, has a must read column on being a conservative in Hollywood. Seriously…. this is a must read. (Hat tip – Jason at Libertas)
Help! I’m a Hollywood Republican – FrontPage Magazine
I’m a Republican. A heretofore secret Hollywood Republican. I know men and women who are heavy drug addicts and they have no problem finding employment in Hollywood. I know men and women who are gambling addicts and they work pretty regularly. There’s even a director who was arrested for child molestation and yet was hired by Disney – yes, Disney – to helm a picture, and people defended this decision by saying even child molesters have a right to work. I would bet my bottom dollar that all these people are on the correct side of the political spectrum. They are liberal democrats.
Me, I’m a Republican. A conservative Republican. I believe passionately in free market capitalism. I believe in the Second Amendment, i.e., the right to bear arms (I even own several guns and go to the shooting range with friends from shul several times a month). I despise communism and fascism, and I believe there is a special place in hell for Islamic totalitarians and their Western apologists – probably 99.9 percent of Hollywood people.
For Mr. Averch, this column is an extraordinary act of courage. It is not hyperbole to suggest that his career may be threatened, and perhaps even his personal safety.
We need more conservatives in our film and TV industry so that the one-track liberal/anti-American political thought machine can have their ideas challenged in the “marketplace of ideas.”
Please, if you have a moment today, drop by Robert’s blog — Seraphic Secret— and drop him a supportive email (link here).
-Bruce (GayPatriot) – gaypatriot2004@aol.com
I hear that Pat Robertson needs an uncredited script doctor.
Good post Dan; thanks for ID’ing his site and plight. I get a kick out of hearing Ben Stein tell his story from time2time, too. There are parallels to Robert’s story. Kind of like being a progressive or pro-choice GOPer in today’s party– only I think the LibLefties in the entertainment industry are less tolerant, inclusive or accepting than most GOPers I’ve met in the last 20 yrs.
I work in the arts. My identity on line has therefore to be kept secret. I KNOW — for an absolute fact — if my political beliefs were “outed” I’d never “work in this town again.” Oh, I’m not saying some people don’t suspect me of heteredoxy. Lots have accused me of being a Green or an anarchist. But those are okay. They’re slightly heretical deviations, not, you know, eeeeeeeevile like believing in the constitution of the United States or that America is humanity’s best hope. Those would get me thrown into the outer darkness.
Chandler – you could do it, right?
Portia – my sincere best wishes!
A Must Read all right. It’s no wonder Mr. Averch makes a good living as a writer – he’s good.
Matt, do you know a lot of LibLefties in the entertainment industry?
He wrote the screenplay for “Body Double.” He talks about it here:
http://www.seraphicpress.com/archives/2005/06/seraphic_reveng.php.
In case you find it a little odd that a pious Orthodox Jew would write such a movie, Mr Arvrech has a response for you:
“I owe no apologies for my professional choices in life. If you object to “Body Double” don’t watch it.”
A few comments.
I appreciate this writer’s observations but I do not think its a problem of being too conservative in Hollywood. The conflict is about not being PC and the economics behind that.
People like the writer on the other end of the spectrum cite similar stories and experiences. Let’s just focus on the gay factor for a second. We’ve yet to see true representations of gay men and women on network TV (although cable has been taking us to hyperreal experiences like Queer As Folk etc.). The last time you saw two men in bed on one of the major networks, where it wasn’t a site gag, was on NBC’s Sisters in the early 1990s. These are shows that are often written by gay men. These are shows whose writers often have many gay friends, relatives and associates. It’s just not OK to go that far with mainstream viewing.
People who openly express liberal viewpoints are shunned. Rosie O’Donnell is an example. A top talk-show host, America’s butchy sweetheart, but when she comes out swinging for gay rights, gun control etc. she’s branded some lefty loony. Same with Ellen. When she’s not PC, as she was at the end of her comedy show, she is shunned. When she’s up there on the stage of her talk show doing those stupid dances and making kissy-kissy nicey-nicey, everyone loves her.
Consider Hollywood actors. Of the myriad of top echelon actors, you can name “out” actors on one hand and more often than not, they are the B-list of the top. Are we to believe that coincidentally there are only straight actors who make the most money and get the best roles? Is it a falsehood or a glass ceiling?
For example, I know of one prominent young R&B singer. Her talent and high profile will make her bankable for years and will allow her and all her entourage to become very wealthy. However, her “assistant” is really her girlfriend and she has basically been forbidden by her management to disclose her relationship. Because it wouldn’t be PC.
As artists, I would hope that people who are shunned in Hollywood would tell it like it is, rather than furthering a false demonization of conservatives. It’s hard to separate your perspective from reality, and Hollywood does tend more to the liberal side of moderation, but most extremes will be and are shunned. It’s not only “conservatives” who are discriminated against. It’s about maintaining a PC sensibility that is driven by economics rather than ideology. Producers don’t make crazy liberal or conservative products unless they think they will sell.
GCB-
He wasn’t writing about making “crazy… conservative products” — he was hired to write a piece about the current war on terror, but wasn’t allowed to have any of the terrorists be Islamic. All the terrorists had to be white, male, protestant Americans.
That’s not about writing for mainstream America.
Chandler – you could do it, right?
Comment by joe
====================
joe,
Yes, I could but that’s only because I’m a comedy writer.
Clint, exactly. That’s why whatever script he’s talking about will not get produced. You can look him up on IMDB to see his great achievements like 1980’s Blood Bride, producer of a documentary about Ed Wood and Plan 9 and Running Delilah also known in Australia as Robospy. His last teleplay was in 2001. I’m sorry to say but I have to think this is more hype for publicity than an expose of the rampant conservative discrimination in Hollywood.
But by that same token, do you think the gay issues I mentioned above are worth considering as liberal discrimination?
Just out of curiosity I pulled his file from http://www.imdb.com.
I present it without comment or opinion. I don’t think I’ve seen most of them, although I remember the titles.
Writer – filmography
(2000s) (1990s) (1980s)
Within These Walls (2001) (TV) (written by)
Brotherhood of Murder (1999) (TV) (screenplay)
The Devil’s Arithmetic (1999) (TV) (teleplay)
Max Q (1998) (TV) (teleplay)
… aka Max Q: Emergency Landing (USA)
Into Thin Air: Death on Everest (1997) (TV) (written by)
… aka Death on Everest
The Infiltrator (1995) (TV) (story)
Running Delilah (1994) (TV) (story) (as Robert Avrech)
… aka Robospy (Australia)
A Stranger Among Us (1992) (written by)
… aka Close to Eden (Australia) (UK: cable TV title)
The Secret Life of Ian Fleming (1990) (TV) (written by)
… aka Spymaker: The Secret Life of Ian Fleming
Scandal in a Small Town (1988) (TV) (written by)
Dark Tower (1987)
Body Double (1984) (screenplay)
Filmography as: Writer, Producer, Director
Producer – filmography
(2000s) (1990s)
Within These Walls (2001) (TV) (producer)
The Devil’s Arithmetic (1999) (TV) (co-executive producer)
A Stranger Among Us (1992) (co-producer)
… aka Close to Eden (Australia) (UK: cable TV title)
Flying Saucers Over Hollywood: The Plan 9 Companion (1992) (V) (executive producer)
… aka The Ed Wood Story: The Plan 9 Companion (reissue title)
Filmography as: Writer, Producer, Director
Director – filmography
Blood Bride (1980)
… aka Death of a Nun
Interesting how having a criminal record is a resume enhancement for liberals.
GCB-
I do think they are worth talking about — but I’m not sure why you think they are “liberal discrimination”.
Ellen and Rosie are comedians. When they get too far to the left of their audience, they no longer connect, and the audience doesn’t laugh at their jokes. That’s not discrimination — it means they aren’t doing their job (making the audience laugh) very well. Contrast to what we’re talking about above as discrimination against conservative views —- the American marketplace would not object to seeing terrorists who are Islamic (they certainly watched ’24’), it’s the producers who object.
The other cases are more apropos — but they aren’t at all viewpoint-discrimination, they are about expecting most gay entertainers to stay closeted. To the extent that this is discrimination, it’s about sexual orientation. But I think it’s more complicated than that.
The role of “hot Hollywood actor” includes a whole host of things involving People magazine and the tabloids that, frankly, I don’t really want to know very much about. But this forces a gay actor to have “pretend” relationships with women for the tabloids to speculate about, and the “legitimate” entertainment press to slaver over.
I think the rise of a critical mass of gay actors in things like Queer as Folk and gay entertainers as in Queer Eye is getting us very close to the day when an actor will be able to come out, and date other openly gay celebrities, fulfilling the role of A-list celeb in the required manner. See, for example, all the buzz surrounding the apparently false rumor of QE’s Kyan Douglas and QaF’s Robert Gant…. Now wouldn’t they have beautiful children!
Poor Conservatives, they are SO discriminated against. Umm, do you think that maybe he’s not going to find work because he’s Republican, or because he says things like, “there is a special place in hell for Islamic totalitarians and their Western apologists – probably 99.9 percent of Hollywood people.”?
Ummm, maybe insulting your potential employers isn’t the best way to find work. As in, “99.9% of Halliburton employees are warmongering profiteers and crooks who swindle Americans out of tax revenue. I’ve submitted my application to the organization, though, in the hopes that the .1% who aren’t fascist swine will hire me.”
Or maybe he doesn’t believe in the “free market” after all and believes that there should be “quotas” in Hollywood to hire more conservatives?
Or, MAYBE his films just SUCK! Like “The Devil’s Arithmetic” and “Wild Things”- I’m sure you guys are HUGE fans of those classics! If his screenwriting SUCKS, why should Hollywood “Islamic totalitarian apologists” hire him? Just because he’s conservative?
This also ignores the fact there are plenty of conservatives who are respected in Hollywood. Clint Eastwood is a supporter of Bush and the War in Iraq and in the midst of this war, his movie Million Dollar Baby took home quite a bit of praise. He might not like that on a daily basis in Hollywood he has to deal with Liberal pussies, but that is just reality. I can’t see him being blackballed simply for being a conservative.
Their are lots of old time Hollywood conservatives. The new ones are quite whiney and shrill.
Haven’t heard Clint come out in support of the war. Saw him address the Academy a month ago and he made it very clear that the whole “make my day” vigilante stuff was strictly fantasy and was nothing we wanted people to actually do. He was proud of the anti-war tone of The Beguiled.
Wow!
I haven’t seen a lib pull Haliburton lie out of their ass in a while. Must have been another lying points blast fax/e-mail.
BTW, if sucky screenwriting kept you from getting jobs, we wouldn’t have any of the crap that’s out there now, would we?
Clint,
I think the rise of a critical mass of gay actors in things like Queer as Folk and gay entertainers as in Queer Eye is getting us very close to the day when an actor will be able to come out, and date other openly gay celebrities, fulfilling the role of A-list celeb in the required manner.
I happen to disagree with you on this. Gay stars on gay shows keep it to themselves and make it a point to not be public about this aspect of their personality. Sean Hayes is a good example. He’s been on one of the most high-profile “gay” shows for years and I don’t think he’s ever been open about his sexuality. Where straight stars are going to any publicity event with photographers, flaunting their partners, openly gay stars in general keep a low-profile or they stay in the closet and “pass.” It’s that simple. Their livelihood depends on their public and they know that a good deal would be turned off by revealing their sexuality. Straight stars of gay shows who play gay characters also make extra effort to overtly state their heterosexuality in public. No straight guy wants to get type-cast as the gay guy.
I know for a fact of a high-profile actor who is basically going back into the closet publicly as he stars in a new network TV show debuting this fall. This after a pretty out time during his years on stage. Not flamboyant but out. Another up-and-comer basically threw in the towel from trying to become something in America after blind items and gossip about his private life. He has a very sweet family to whom he’s very close and so he moved back to the UK to come out with a steady partner. He will be starting the second season of a high-profile television series there this year. It only takes a thought to recognize the UK has given us some of our most out-proud entertainers like Ian McKellen, Elton John, Rupert Everett. Even here in the US we have to rely on lesbians to carry the torch.
So basically, in Hollywood, you’re expected to keep your gayness to yourself if you have any high-profile ambitions and pass as straight. I think Dan should be able to confirm this. That seems pretty discriminatory to me. So as I said, in the movie and TV industry, people don’t necessarily discriminate against someone because they have conservative viewpoints. The industry is one of the most cutthroat businesses run by some of the most short-sighted, ambitious people ever to go through business school. Conservatives are discriminated against because they are outside a general norm within Hollywood. And just as gay cinema and tv are doing by developing independent films, tv shows and networks, so are the conservatives. There’s people who will buy anything, however there are not always producers who will pay you to make those things, nor should you expect them to.
Ellen and Rosie are comedians. When they get too far to the left of their audience, they no longer connect, and the audience doesn’t laugh at their jokes. That’s not discrimination — it means they aren’t doing their job
I agree there. But the point is there is a double standard or, better phrased, an advantage to playing straight. Entertainers’ livelihood doesn’t begin and end at their concert or their movie or their play. They use their personal lives as a foil to promote and extend their celebrity thus extending their drawing power. It all adds up to money. And when you either feel uncomfortable or unwilling to play the PR game, you lose out.
Wow!
I haven’t seen a lib pull Haliburton lie out of their ass in a while. Must have been another lying points blast fax/e-mail.
You missed the point entirely. Either you’re not too bright or intentionally disregarding the fact that insulting potential emplyeers is probably not the best way to find work. Furthermore, what kind of “Islamic totalitarian apologists” is he referring to? Show me some direct quotes of those Hollywood types apologizing for fascist regimes. Maybe I should have accused Halliburton of being apologists for Islamic fascist regimes since they (or their ‘subsidiaries’) traded with our ENEMIES during sanctions (and during ‘Go F**K himself’ Cheney’s Regime). These enemies included Iran, Afghanistan, AND IRAQ! So who was ‘aiding and abetting the enemy’? IN FACT, CHENEY HIMSELF SPOKE OUT PUBLICLY CALLING FOR AN END TO ECONOMIC SANCTIONS TOWARDS IRAN!!!
In the end, I don’t expect you to let facts get in your way- that’s something today’s Republican party would never do.
BTW, if sucky screenwriting kept you from getting jobs, we wouldn’t have any of the crap that’s out there now, would we?
Isn’t capitalism ‘give the people what they want’? Why, then, are the ‘conservatives’ the ones to crow about 1 second of Janet Jackson’s breast during one of the highest rated Superbowl half time shows ever? Why do they speak out against rap music and the vulgarity of Hollywood? If the people weren’t buying it, Hollywood and the music industry would stop making it. Arnold Schwarzenegger seems to doing okay with some of his ‘crap’ (like the Terminator series) wereas other of his crap (Last Action Hero) didn’t go over so well. SO. . . how did “The Devils’ Arithmetic’ do at the box office?
haven’t seen a lib pull Haliburton lie out of their ass in a while. Must have been another lying points blast fax/e-mail.
BTW, are you suggesting that Halliburton didn’t overcharge? If so, the Pentagon disagrees with you:
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,114488,00.html
Show me some direct quotes of those Hollywood types apologizing for fascist regimes.
Hmmm, where do we start — Hanoi Jane Fonda, perhaps? Maybe Sean Penn’s trips to Iraq and his flowery love fest over Saddam Hussein? Michael Moore and his attempts to paint Iraq as a kite-flying paradise?
Maybe I should have accused Halliburton of being apologists for Islamic fascist regimes since they (or their ’subsidiaries’) traded with our ENEMIES during sanctions (and during ‘Go F**K himself’ Cheney’s Regime).
So did Kofi Annan, the bulk of the UN bureaucracy, and the governments of France, Germany, China, and Russia. Were you worried then?
Why, then, are the ‘conservatives’ the ones to crow about 1 second of Janet Jackson’s breast during one of the highest rated Superbowl half time shows ever?
Because the view of Janet Jackson’s breast came at the END of that halftime show, and in essence, had nothing to do with the ratings in terms of numbers of viewers — they had already tuned in for other reasons. What it DID show is that Hollywood will be deliberately deceptive to show obscene material.
Why do they speak out against rap music and the vulgarity of Hollywood? If the people weren’t buying it, Hollywood and the music industry would stop making it.
Like I pointed out, people didn’t tune into the Super Bowl halftime show to see Janet Jackson’s breasts. Hollywood lied to them in order to show them obscenity.
You missed the point entirely.
I got it and dismissed it as the usual leftist drivel.
Maybe I should have accused Halliburton of being apologists for Islamic fascist regimes since they (or their ’subsidiaries’) traded with our ENEMIES during sanctions.
Why would they be apologist for fascist regimes if they were ALLOWED to do business with those countries. But I don’t expect you to let facts get in your way. That’s something today’s lying liberals would never do.
Did you whine when lord BJ used them?
In the end, I don’t expect you to let facts get in your way- that’s something today’s Republican party would never do.
Facts or your liberal spin? There’s a huge difference.
Or, MAYBE his films just SUCK!
And yet Quentin Tarantino still gets work.
Dusk til Dawn anyone?
Because the view of Janet Jackson’s breast came at the END of that halftime show, and in essence, had nothing to do with the ratings in terms of numbers of viewers — they had already tuned in for other reasons. What it DID show is that Hollywood will be deliberately deceptive to show obscene material.
Yeah, that’s why they let MTV plan the show and advertise in advance that it “would be provocative”. And they were aware of Janet Jackson and Justin Timberlake’s body of work (so to speak), weren’t they? And I suppose they were not told that they would be performing “Rock your body” which anyone can Google includes the lyric “bet I have you naked by the end of this song”? It’s a bit like ESPN hiring Rush Limbaugh and then being surprised when he starts politicizing football. I was just shocked!
Did you whine when lord BJ used them?
Did Clinton own stock options in the company? Would conservatives have had a problem if there was an apparent conflict of interest with one of Clinton’s contractors?
And, what do Republicans have against Blowjobs anyway? Me, I kind of like them.
Why would they be apologist for fascist regimes if they were ALLOWED to do business with those countries.
Ummm, it was (and is) against the law to do business with some of these regimes. If THAT isn’t supporting our enemies, I don’t know what is.
And yet Quentin Tarantino still gets work.
Dusk til Dawn anyone?
Pulp Fiction, Reservoir Dogs, Jackie Brown, Kill Bill Vol 1 & 2.
Although he wrote “Dusk till Dawn” (which sucked), he did not direct it. And I’d take his track record over, ummm….. say, what was his name again?????
Making movies that consistently suck doesn’t seem to have hurt the careers of Spike Lee, Ben Affleck, or Kevin Costner.
Movies sucking of course being subjective and having nothing to do with the conversation of course. I go back to what someone said about what people want and capitalism. If this conservative guy, whatever his name was, was actually giving people what they want and was successful, he probably wouldn’t care if others didn’t like his political views. He sounds like he’s excusing his failed career by blaming liberals. Gimme a break. Most hollywood types are liberal. No denying. That doesn’t mean they necessarily support fascist regimes nearly as much as they would PREFER not to go to war. They are today’s hippies. Big deal. They are hollywood types. You either respect their opinion or you don’t. And rarely does it have anything to do with their ability to act or get employment. And as far hollywood types supporting distasteful regimes, let’s face it, during the 80s and early 90s, there was much lip service paid to Saddam, Osama and the Taliban by Republicans when it benefited them. No one is perfect. Get over this hollywood liberal BS and if you think it shouldn’t matter what hollywood types say, then ignore them.
As usual, you’re all acting like liberals and playing the ‘victimization card’ when it suits. The interesting question is, “Why are most good artists liberal”? To generalize, many occupations self-select (ie military personel, police officers, and financial consultants are MOSTLY conservative; designers and artists are mostly liberal). Not to say that there aren’t exceptions, but generally this is true. Even conservative ideologues’ favorite artists are liberal (Rush Limbaugh’s theme is the Pretenders, his favorite band is the Beatles). Unless you are one of the few who thinks that Ted Nugent is a brilliant musician you would have to admit this fact. Even the conservative artists are less conservative than the mainstream Republicans (Tobe Keith says he’s a “Conservative Democrat”, Arnold Schwarzenegger is a liberal Republican, etc).
Stop pretending that you are some kind of victims of a vast conspiracy. Geez, for all your whining you sound exactly like the “culture of victimization” which you claim to despise!
Yeah, that’s why they let MTV plan the show and advertise in advance that it “would be provocative”. And they were aware of Janet Jackson and Justin Timberlake’s body of work (so to speak), weren’t they? And I suppose they were not told that they would be performing “Rock your body” which anyone can Google includes the lyric “bet I have you naked by the end of this song”?
Question, Mr. Bull Milk…..had they been honest and told people what they were going to do, would they have been allowed to air it?
Of course not. So they lied.
The interesting question is, “Why are most good artists liberal”? To generalize, many occupations self-select (ie military personel, police officers, and financial consultants are MOSTLY conservative; designers and artists are mostly liberal). Not to say that there aren’t exceptions, but generally this is true.
So the logic here is that artistic talent makes one liberal?
What I would find far more likely is that what you can actually do in terms of talent is secondary to whom you know in the arts industry (see entries under “Hilton, Paris” and “Spelling, Tori”). How likely do you think producers who espouse their virulent anti-Bush and anti-conservative stance are to sponsor, promote, or support someone who publicly supports Bush and conservatives?
Is anyone else vaguely insulted by someone posting under the nome de plume “Jesus”?
You must live in a mighty whitey part of America because some days half of my students are named Jesus. I think they would be vaguely insulted by your assumption.
The difference is, Chandler, that it is highly unlikely your students named “Jesus” were named that as a means of showing disrespect to Christians and Christianity.
I’m afraid I cannot say the same of our poster here.
You must live in a mighty whitey part of America
So what if he is? Not everybody can live in your fabricated Utopia.
So the logic here is that artistic talent makes one liberal?
Not quite. Individuals more likely to use firearms typically are conservative and pursue law enforcement and military careers. People in academia and the artist community are more likely to be liberal. They are also more likely to use Macintosh computers. I draw no conclusions, but find it interesting- one could speculate about why this is so. Perhaps those who can empathize and get inside characters or their audience are more likely to be liberal. Perhaps liberals are more well read and educated (they are ‘elitest’, right?) The fact is that it’s true a correlation exists, though it’s by NO MEANS a hard and fast rule.
What I would find far more likely is that what you can actually do in terms of talent is secondary to whom you know in the arts industry
How is that any different from any industry? Wasn’t GW’s daddy in the oil business; and the political business for that matter? Don’t lawyer’s children have more liklihood of going into law? If your dad is a farmer, isn’t your liklihood of also being a farmer increased? Is it a mere coincidence that Halliburton hired a former chief of defense as CEO? This in and of itself does not explain why most artists are liberal. BTW, do you reallyThe difference is, Chandler, that it is highly unlikely your students named “Jesus” were named that as a means of showing disrespect to Christians and Christianity.
How did I show Christianity disrespect? Geez, don’t be so sensitive! What kind of ‘PC’ group is this anyway?
That last bit was supposed to read:
Do you really think Paris Hilton is liberal? She strikes me as an apolitical idiot, though the Hilton family has benefitted greatly from the Bush tax cuts and I wouldn’t be surprised if, for that reason alone, she’s a Republican.
The difference is, Chandler, that it is highly unlikely your students named “Jesus” were named that as a means of showing disrespect to Christians and Christianity.
If you’re upset with my using the name Jesus, you must really be pissed that Pat Robertson intones His name when preaching his nutty ideas. Isn’t “Thou Shalt not Bear False Witness” a commandment?
I draw no conclusions, but find it interesting- one could speculate about why this is so. Perhaps those who can empathize and get inside characters or their audience are more likely to be liberal. Perhaps liberals are more well read and educated (they are ‘elitest’, right?)
Perhaps people who promote misogyny and gaybashing, i.e. hip-hop artists, are more likely to be liberal. Perhaps people who lie about their background and plagiarize their academic research (i.e. Ward Churchill) are more likely to be liberal.
As for the rest, of course I’m upset about Pat Robertson perverting Christianity as a vehicle for his inane ravings and hatreds. What else would I think?
Have we not discussed Pat Robertson on this board recently? Probably because opinion is so uniform that there’s no point in discussing it.
For the record: raving lunatic. The GOP equivalent of Michael Moore, only worse in that he’s been around (and given credence by some) for longer.
Perhaps people who promote misogyny and gaybashing, i.e. hip-hop artists, are more likely to be liberal. Perhaps people who lie about their background and plagiarize their academic research (i.e. Ward Churchill) are more likely to be liberal.
This is a joke, right? Maybe it’s because liberals are better able to do serious analysis and conservatives cannot approach things objectively. If misogyny and gay-bashing correlate with liberalism, why aren’t rednecks in the ‘red states’ mostly liberal? I don’t know that Ward Churchill is liberal anymore than Eric Rudolph or Timothy McVeigh are conservative. C’mon NDT, you can surely do better than this?!?!?
Perhaps conservatives like rules, discipline, and order – traits which don’t lend themselves to creativity. They are more dogmatic, less skeptical, and distrust things that defy their preconceived notions. Liberals, on the other hand, are like corelling cats. They are more likely to defy categorization, less dogmatic, and consequently more creative. They are, however, not very good at organizing, common purpose, and are a bit idealistic and naive. These are all artistic traits, but are also the traits that conservatives criticize as being weak, indecisive, and ass making liberals poor leaders.
Maybe you don’t agree, but at least I can make an objective analysis without resorting to mere insults.
Also, art is about asking questions. Liberals are much more likely to question their own beliefs than conservatives. Doubt is weakness to conservatives- this is why there was precious little thought given to the post-war plan in Iraq. The Iraqis were supposed to welcome us with open arms and try to create a society just like the US. This is the naivte and idealism of the Right- that everybody wants to be just like us because we’re NUMBER ONE!!!
Although liberals also have faith, they are less likely to think that they have a monopoly on the truth and are more likely to introspect and question their beliefs. The fact that some here are offended by my mere use of religious names (but probably only the CHRISTIAN ones offend them) only serves to prove my point.
For the record: raving lunatic. The GOP equivalent of Michael Moore, only worse in that he’s been around (and given credence by some) for longer.
Good, we agree. Only the conservatives have a bunch of Michael Moores- like Rush Limbaugh, Ann Coulter, Sean Hannity, etc, etc. Yet, they are embraced by the party. In contrast, the Democrats have distanced themselves from Moore- this also goes to my above point. If Moore was a conservative film-maker, he would be embraced by the conservatives regardless of how jumbled his facts. I am a liberal and enjoy Moore’s films, but I take them (and everything) with a grain of salt. They are certainly not ‘documentaries’ considering how loose he is with his facts, but are more like editorials- just like Limbaugh, Coulter, etc only less obviously offensive (‘ie “We should invade their countries, kill their leaders, and convert them to Christianity”- Coulter or “This was a brilliant idea! Nobody was hurt- it was like a skull and bones society initiation or a Madonna concert”- Limbaugh talking about Abu Graib)
If misogyny and gay-bashing correlate with liberalism, why aren’t rednecks in the ‘red states’ mostly liberal?
Tsk tsk, Buddha Christ….as expected, when presented with a real example of misogynistic and gay-bashing liberals/creative artists — hip hop stars — you instead fall back on a tired old stereotype about “rednecks”, rather than dealing with the facts. Same with your Ward Churchill statement.
In contrast, the Democrats have distanced themselves from Moore- this also goes to my above point.
Yep, they only dedicate protests to him and call him a truth-teller.
Tsk tsk, Buddha Christ….as expected, when presented with a real example of misogynistic and gay-bashing liberals/creative artists — hip hop stars — you instead fall back on a tired old stereotype about “rednecks”, rather than dealing with the facts. Same with your Ward Churchill statement.
When did I say that there are no misogynistic and gay-bashing liberals? You are the one who refuses to engage in real debate and resorted to insults which do nothing to address any of the points of this discussion. Why are most artists and academics liberal? You really think it’s because liberals are misogynists and gay bashers and that there are none of these in the conservative movement?
If you can’t come up with any valid points, you should keep your mouth shut.
NDT, you kind of prove my point that conservatives can’t approach things objectively. BTW, didn’t you fall into a “tired old stereotype” about hip-hop artists? Should it not matter to me that it is also true? And, isn’t my statement about rednecks also true?
I shouldn’t have to hold your hand and walk you through how to construct a valid argument.
I’d just like to point out that Kanye West, a liberal, has called on rap and hip hop artists to end their use of gay bashing in song lyrics. While not all liberals are politically correct and universally tolerant, it tends to be the liberals who call on them to become more politically correct and universally tolerant of others. The libs aren’t perfect by any means but when you hear someone calling for tolerance, acceptance and fair attitudes towards others, it’s usually coming from another liberal.
Let’s back up a step — is it true that most artists and scholars are liberal?
It’s certainly true that most university scholars are liberal — but most “think tank” scholars and industrial scientists are conservative.
It’s certainly true that most popular musicians and hollywood actors seem to be liberal, but what if we look at, say, best-selling fiction authors?
I have no idea what the answer will be — but the original question was about the (well-documented) overwhelming liberal presence in Hollywood.
If we’re going to expand the topic, let’s at least be sure we’re investigating the causes of an effect that actually exists!
Britton-
Yes, it usually is liberals leading the charge for tolerance — as long as it’s tolerance of members of a pre-defined liberal-victim-class. Hating Republicans, Chrisitians, men, white folks, the rich, the military, and law enforcement…. that doesn’t seem to raise quite as many liberal eyebrows. Perfectly true, though, that there are those on the right who scream about anti-Christian bigotry while expressing anti-muslim bigotry, sometimes in the same breath. It’s just not always clear that those, on either side, who cry “Intolerance!” aren’t really just defending their perceived allies.
But while some liberals focus on tolerance, it tends to be conservatives who suggest that entertainers perhaps ought to avoid glorifying rape, misogyny, senseless violence, or the murder of law enforcement officials. Suggestions which are often met with liberal cries of “Censorship!”
Let’s back up a step — is it true that most artists and scholars are liberal?. . .
It’s certainly true that most university scholars are liberal — but most “think tank” scholars and industrial scientists are conservative.
Now, we finally have a pithy question. Although almost all scientists agree about evolution (despite the false “contradiction” the religious right has ignorantly set up), there are a great many who are conservative. This, I believe, fits into my theory that conservatives trust method, process, and order. Most “think-tanks” were historically created to promote conservatism, so that doesn’t seem relevant (and a bit like saying “most environmental groups are liberal”. While there are many conservatives who are environmentalists, they haven’t yet created organizations to promote their ideas)
It’s certainly true that most popular musicians and hollywood actors seem to be liberal, but what if we look at, say, best-selling fiction authors?
Again, good question! I, too, would be interested in the result of such a study.
I have no idea what the answer will be — but the original question was about the (well-documented) overwhelming liberal presence in Hollywood.
If we’re going to expand the topic, let’s at least be sure we’re investigating the causes of an effect that actually exists!
Ok. . . I made no claim of a causal relationship, just a correlation. I get sick of all the whining and complaining about discrimination against conservatives in Hollywood. It sounds like they just want to blame their failures on outside forces.
This is a bit like a man whining that they are discriminated against in the nursing field, or a woman claiming discrimination because there are so few female auto mechanics, or a liberal race car driver claiming discrimination merely because most NASCAR drivers are conservative.
Yes, it usually is liberals leading the charge for tolerance — as long as it’s tolerance of members of a pre-defined liberal-victim-class. Hating Republicans, Chrisitians, men, white folks, the rich, the military, and law enforcement…. that doesn’t seem to raise quite as many liberal eyebrows.
What? Did you SEE the conventions this year? Which one had more anger and hatred for the other party? Sure, Zell Miller is a Democrat, but what about the “purple heart band-aids”, etc? Cheney and Rove have said some very mean spirited things about Democrats, but I wouldn’t call this anything more than partisanship.
And Christians? Is it discrimation to want Jefferson-style separation of church and state? What if a state or county wanted to enshine Islam as their official religion in the US? Would it be discrimination or hate to want a separation of church and state in such a case? I don’t see any Christian bashing- in fact, it seems like Christians control most of our government, are CEOs in large corporations, attend colleges and universities in large numbers, etc, etc. Claims of discrimination against white conservative Christians are absurd and border on paranoid delusions!
But while some liberals focus on tolerance, it tends to be conservatives who suggest that entertainers perhaps ought to avoid glorifying rape, misogyny, senseless violence, or the murder of law enforcement officials. Suggestions which are often met with liberal cries of “Censorship!”
While I’m a liberal who is stauchly opposed to censorship, I believe market forces and privatly organized campaigns should influence these choices. Government should stay out of controlling free speech, as far as I’m concerned. If people weren’t going to see these films, then Hollywood would stop making them. I certainly won’t let my children watch/listen to/attend some of the tripe which passes for popular art these days. But that is my job as their parent.
I’m confused, though, didn’t Tipper Gore help start the PRMC? Isn’t Hillary Clinton speaking out against violence in TV, movies, and video games especially directed at law enforcement? Give me some examples of liberals who hate the military, law enforcement, white Christians, the rich, etc. Becuase I think this exists only in your own head and is much like me erronously claiming “Conservatives hate the poor, the non-white Christians, and believe that those in police or military custody should be tortured and abused.”
It is interesting, though, that race seems to play a big part in how threatening these songs, movies, etc are perceived to be. For instance, Ice-T’s “Cop Killer” is thematically similar to “I Shot the Sheriff”. “New Jack City” is much like “The Godfather”. “The Sopranos” is widely watched and enjoyed by both liberals and conservatives. And when Arnold Schwarzenegger or Clint Eastwood plays an outlaw who kills law enforcement, it doesn’t seem to much bother conservatives.
Could this have something to do with it?
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/08/10/AR2005081001791.html
Money Quote:
Goeglein recalled a dinner party that he and his wife recently attended in Northwest. Out of the six couples around the table, Goeglein and his wife were the only Republicans.
As is inevitably the case, he said, the conversation soon turned to the couples’ children — most 5 or 6 years old — and aspirations for their future occupations. One parent said editor; another, publisher; a third wanted the child to go into education.
“I was intrigued by the question, and the answers of every one of our Democratic friends,” Goeglein said. Not one parent, he said, gave an answer that would be more typical of Republicans. “Our party, in the way it is constituted, we think of medicine, we think of law, we think of business. We don’t think, gee, I hope my son grows up to be a great playwright or painter or poet,” he explained.
Could it be as simple as Conservatives not valuing the arts as much as liberals? Consequently, they don’t encourage and cultivate the artistic tendencies of their children. Could this be part of the puzzle?
Give me some examples of liberals who hate the military, law enforcement, white Christians, the rich, etc.
Nicholas De Genova — aka Mr. “million Mogadishus”
Eric Foner — “The only true heroes are those who find ways to defeat the US armed forces”
Ramsey Clark, founder of International A.N.S.W.E.R.
Louis Farrakhan
Kweisi Mfume
Shall we continue?
For instance, Ice-T’s “Cop Killer” is thematically similar to “I Shot the Sheriff”. “New Jack City” is much like “The Godfather”.
I think most everyone knows the lyrics to “I Shot the Sheriff”, but probably not to “Cop-Killer”.
One talks in a tone of resignation about shooting in self-defense and admitting what they did was wrong. The other does not. I’ll leave it to you to figure out which is which.
Could it be as simple as Conservatives not valuing the arts as much as liberals? Consequently, they don’t encourage and cultivate the artistic tendencies of their children.
Of course, that fully explains why my parents bought us a piano, paid for lessons for me and my siblings, came to our recitals, encouraged me to take voice lessons, loved when I minored in music in college….yup, perfectly logical.
Nicholas De Genova — aka Mr. “million Mogadishus”
Eric Foner — “The only true heroes are those who find ways to defeat the US armed forces”
Ramsey Clark, founder of International A.N.S.W.E.R.
Louis Farrakhan
Kweisi Mfume
Are those individuals “liberal”, NDT? Or merely liberal in the same way Timothy McVeigh, Eric Rudolph, James Kopp, and neo-nazis are “conservative”?
I think most everyone knows the lyrics to “I Shot the Sheriff”, but probably not to “Cop-Killer”.
C’mon, sure there’s a matter of degree, but Ice-T’s rap was in direct response to police brutality. He countered and capitalized upon the angst with the song.
Did you know “I shot the Sheriff” was written by Bob Marley and Peter Tosh (a revolutionary “cop-hater” as you would say)? I’m sure the reaction to The Wailer’s version would be different than to Clapton’s version.
Moreover, what about Guns and Roses’ “I used to love her, but I had to kill her”. How is that different than many country songs, including Johnny Cash’s “Dehlia”?
As I pointed out, there are many cases of white gangsters, folk heros, and outlaws played by Western movie stars, Eastwood, Schwarzenegger, etc. They are all fictionalized accounts of “bad guys”. How exactly is that any different than “Cop Killer”, “New Jack City”, or “gangsta’ (sic) rap”?
Moreover, I never implied that there aren’t conservatives who value the arts. It’s just a correlation that more liberals are in the arts and I’m theorizing why that is.
Did you read the article? the last statement:
But for Helprin, the divide remains. “The arts community is generally dominated by liberals because if you are concerned mainly with painting or sculpture, you don’t have time to study how the world works. And if you have no understanding of economics, strategy, history and politics, then naturally you would be a liberal.”
Doesn’t he unwittingly prove the point that he values theses “worthwhile endeavors” over the arts? What if I was to say, “Those who have no understanding of sculpture, music, painting, or theater, you would naturally be a conservative”?
One last thing from the biography ot Peter Tosh, to co-writer of “I Shot the Sherif”:
Never before had such a public figure openly insulted and contested the Jamaican regime. That is what separated Peter from the rest of his peers in the Jamaican music industry. While Bob Marley decided to go more mainstream, and easygoing, and Bunny became somewhat reclusive and unnoticed, Peter continued on in his same staunch, militant manner. This gave the people of Jamaica a strong leader whom they could trust to hold his morals steadfast in the face of adversity. It is not a coincidence that just four short months after Peter’s verbal assault on the powers that be in Jamaica, that he was beaten to within an inch of death by as many as ten police officers. This, however, was just one of many cases of police brutality involving Peter Tosh. These attacks did not stop Peter, though, as they seemed to just make him madder and stronger. Peter loved the limelight, not because of the attention he got, but because of the issues it allowed him to bring attention to. While these physical attacks did little to censor Peter, it was the ethereal attacks which put fear into his heart.
Does knowing who wrote this song change anyone’s mind about it?
And some lyrics from the song:
Sheriff John Brown always hated me,
for what I don’t know.
Every time that I plant a seed
he said, ‘Kill it before it grows’.
He said, ‘Kill it before it grows’.
But I say
I shot the sheriff but I swear it was in self-defence.
I shot the sheriff but I swear it was in self-defence.
Freedom came my way one day
and I started out of town.
All of a sudden I see sheriff John Brown
aiming to shoot me down
so I shot, I shot him down.
Knowing Marley and Tosh, what “seed” do you think he was planting? Sure, it’s a metaphor, but literally this is about a drug crime where a police officer attempts to make a drug bust and gets killed.
Well, at least he didn’t shoot the deputy; something Ice-T’s character would have done ; )
Are those individuals “liberal”, NDT? Or merely liberal in the same way Timothy McVeigh, Eric Rudolph, James Kopp, and neo-nazis are “conservative”?
That’s a fair question. Do you say that of the latter group?
C’mon, sure there’s a matter of degree, but Ice-T’s rap was in direct response to police brutality.
And it’s a completely-invalid response. “I Shot the Sheriff” admits that, “Cop-Killer” doesn’t.
Of course, the irony for me is that far more blacks die from being shot by other blacks than from beatings or shootings by white cops. However, that doesn’t fit the “blame everyone else first” mentality that characterizes blacks and liberals, and that explains why you can justify or defend a song that promotes unrepentant, outright murder of law enforcement agents.
As I pointed out, there are many cases of white gangsters, folk heros, and outlaws played by Western movie stars, Eastwood, Schwarzenegger, etc. They are all fictionalized accounts of “bad guys”. How exactly is that any different than “Cop Killer”, “New Jack City”, or “gangsta’ (sic) rap”?
Because, BC, I don’t see people on the news on a daily basis imitating Clint Eastwood in “The Outlaw Josey Wales”. However, I DO see them on the news on a daily basis imitating “New Jack City”.
When kids play cowboys or gangsters, they don’t use real guns. When they play gang members, like Ice-T and others encourage them to do, they play with real guns.
Moreover, I never implied that there aren’t conservatives who value the arts. It’s just a correlation that more liberals are in the arts and I’m theorizing why that is.
You know, I sense a pattern here. You make a derogatory, stereotypical remark about conservatives, then when pressed, backpedal with “I never implied” or “I never said” or “I was just asking a question”.
I suppose the correct response to that at this point is very simply, “Why did you ask it in the first place, if you knew it wasn’t true?”
Of course, the irony for me is that far more blacks die from being shot by other blacks than from beatings or shootings by white cops. However, that doesn’t fit the “blame everyone else first” mentality that characterizes blacks and liberals, and that explains why you can justify or defend a song that promotes unrepentant, outright murder of law enforcement agents.
Isn’t this thread about blaming the liberal Hollywood for lack of opportunities for poor conservative writers/directors/producers/actors? I wasn’t defending the song, except to say that I believe in the first amendment and think it is the parent’s, not the government’s, job to not let their children listen to hateful or violent music/TV shows/movies.
You know, I sense a pattern here. You make a derogatory, stereotypical remark about conservatives, then when pressed, backpedal with “I never implied” or “I never said” or “I was just asking a question”.
Ummm, when did I make a derogatory statement about conservatives? In fact, I said that there’s no hard and fast rule, but that more artists tend to be liberal. This is a fact. What if I was to say “Most hip-hop artists are black”? That is a stereotype, but also happens to be true. Now, this thread is basically about white hip-hoppers claiming discrimination because there aren’t more white rappers. Or straight male hairdressers claiming discrimination because many male hairdressers are gay. I’m saying “Don’t blame Hollywood liberals because there aren’t more conservative actors There’s some reason more liberals pursue a career in the arts than conservatives and I’m speculating as to why that might be. I even said that many “liberal” qualities make them appear indecisive and not good leaders, but that these are qualities of good artists. Are you really having such a hard time understanding this thread, or are you playing the victim and imagining that I’m attacking all conservatives?
You know, NDT, the only “serious” idea you offered about why more artists are liberal is because they are misogynist gay bashers. When I pointed out that there were quite a few conservative rednecks who fit this description yet they weren’t artists, you accused me of a tired stereotype.
I’m detecting a pattern of you accusing me of doing exactly what you yourself are doing. You haven’t disagreed with the premise that there are more liberal artists, yet offered only an insulting statement towards artists in general. I could have pointed out the hip-hop artists who aren’t misogynist gay bashers, but that’s beside the point. Again, if you have nothing to say, NDT, then don’t say it!
Or maybe we should ban Ice-T and the Wailer’s version of “I Shot the Sherif”, but allow Eric Clapton’s version. I personally find lots of music/tv/movies offensive, but don’t think it’s the government’s job to ban objectionable material. As a parallel, I can think of precious little good that comes out of regular citizens owning assault rifles, but would you have the government ban those as well?
To paraphrase the NRA:
“Assault rifles don’t kill people, Ice-T songs do.”
I wasn’t defending the song, except to say that I believe in the first amendment and think it is the parent’s, not the government’s, job to not let their children listen to hateful or violent music/TV shows/movies.
And I don’t have a problem with that.
There’s some reason more liberals pursue a career in the arts than conservatives and I’m speculating as to why that might be.
Here’s the problem, BC. What Hollywood produces has very little to do with artistic talent, as the bulk of this summer’s movies should show you, and a great deal to do with marketing/hype.
nice to be seen