Upcoming
Youth in Revolt
January 15
January 22
Drool
The Girl on the Train
Righties Slam Boogieman
Politico's Jeffrey Ressner has found some conservative-minded types who have problems with Stefan Forbes' Boogieman, the recently screened Los Angeles Film Festival doc about Lee Atwater, the southern-born Republican opportunist and campaign attack dog who introduced pure unmitigated evil into the American political system by pushing negative images of his Republican clients based on race-baiting, divisive half-truths and flat-out lies.
Forbes' film, trust me, is a fairly drawn portrait of an absolutely wretched and malicious scumbag, a Karl Rove-ian manipulator of the first order who sprinkled hate and slander like so much fertilizer, a guy who tried to apologize to victims of his evil spinnings on his deathbed out of fear he might go to hell. And yet he's got defenders who are sticking up for him.
Republican political consultant Mike Murphy has told Ressner that the film is “a pejorative, liberal cartoon,†and that the doc is guilty of "a greater assault on the truth than anything Lee Atwater was accused of." My view of the film -- “the sharpest and fairest portrait of smear politics and Republican culture since So Goes the Nation, last year's doc about the 2004 election" -- is quoted in the piece. A third view comes from Breitbart.com's Andrew Breitbart, who complains to Resser about "the director's deft use of Joe Conason, Terry McAuliffe and Eric Alterman as objective voices to drive the narrative."
Meaning that the film would work better if Forbes had spoken to more Atwater pallies and Republican apologists? Guess what? Such guys are heard from all through the film. This isn't a one-sided doc, despite what Murphy and Breitbart will tell you.
Posted by Jeffrey Wells on June 24, 2008 at 5:59 PM
comment #1
The Hoyk
says ...
You've got some minor HTML problems in that third paragraph - probably forgot to close a hyperlink or two.
Substance of the piece comes through. Atwater is in line behind Hitler right now waiting for his daily pineapple in the keister.
Posted by The Hoyk
at June 24, 2008 7:27 PM
comment #2
BurmaShave
says ...
Most people attribute the Willie Horton ad to Atwater, but it was actually Larr McCarthy and an independant group. The Bush campaign certainly benefited from it, and didn't do much to discredit it, but to paint Atwater as some kind of KKK member is absurd. He was personal friends with BB King and Percy Sledge, for fucks sake. The above comparison to Hitler is of course par for the course and part of the hyberbole that can make me ashamed to be a Democrat. How about we quit whining and start winning?
Posted by BurmaShave
at June 24, 2008 8:28 PM
comment #3
Mgmax
says ...
"Atwater is in line behind Hitler right now waiting for his daily pineapple in the keister."
Perhaps it would be more apt to say he's in line behind, say, Senator Theodore Bilbo, D-Miss.
Posted by Mgmax
at June 24, 2008 9:43 PM
comment #4
D.Z.
says ...
Burma: It's not entirely unmerited, considering Herb is the son of a nazi sympathizer, and all...
Mgmax: So using a play-book from a guy discredited 40 years before the '88 election makes the Dems look bad, because...?
Posted by D.Z.
at June 24, 2008 11:10 PM
comment #5
Richardson
says ...
This just in... both sides have extreme examples of almost every bad behavior you can find, and people will always use this fact to distract from their sides' worse behavior.
Posted by Richardson
at June 24, 2008 11:38 PM
comment #6
Mgmax
says ...
Jeff said "introduced." I'm suggesting that there might have been racism in American politics before 1988.
Anyway, the Wikipedia page on Bilbo is pretty damn funny to read. What a skunk!
Posted by Mgmax
at June 25, 2008 5:23 AM
comment #7
Rich S.
says ...
Nice to see Dirk Benedict getting work.
Posted by Rich S.
at June 25, 2008 5:58 AM
comment #8
tommysunshine
says ...
I agree with Burma. Atwater's purposes were honest and his business was legit. He was just doing his job. His trade was treachery but in politics you transgress if you trust everybody and everything. What's the point of trying to change the democratic process if you're convinced all around you is peace, love and understanding. Nice guys don't finish last by any means but they also don't hanker after votes.
Posted by tommysunshine
at June 25, 2008 7:08 AM
comment #9
Walter Sobchak
says ...
Shut up, Richardson, just shut up! Stop inferring that slime exists on both sides of the political divide. (I'd better not hear you pointing out that the Democrats, namely Al Gore, introduced the name Willie Horton during their '88 primary!)
Everybody knows that Democrats are sweet, harmless little kittens who work hard and play fair and are adorable when they rub against you. Conversely everybody knows that Republicans are big, scary monsters with fangs and forked tongues and yellow eyes and they live under your bed and will get you when you're sleeping and.....
cut to:
D.Z. cutting and pasting above, then adding "sounds pretty accurate to me"....
Posted by Walter Sobchak
at June 25, 2008 7:14 AM
comment #10
Alan Cerny
says ...
Righteous indignation from a neo-con is like a whore being offended if asked to go anal.
Posted by Alan Cerny
at June 25, 2008 8:27 AM
comment #11
bb
says ...
Jeff will you ever run out of superlatives?
Alan Cerny, can you identify these neo cons you speak of?
Posted by bb
at June 25, 2008 9:01 AM
comment #12
Detroit Jeff
says ...
"...race-baiting, divisive half-truths and flat-out lies."
Sounds like the 2008 Democratic fucking primary to me. Pure evil.
Posted by Detroit Jeff
at June 25, 2008 10:24 AM
comment #13
GonePostal
says ...
If Joe Conason and Eric Alterman are offering "perspective", I shudder to think about the doc's tone. AlterI wonder who they have on defending Atwater. Any Dem operatives? Should be, considering they use his tactics. I'd wait to see it before passing judgement, because Atwater was a political genius. Dems hated him because he was good at what he did. Also, he didn't invent Willie Horton nor did he create the ad. But hey, who needs facts when you've got a narrative to maintain.
Posted by GonePostal
at June 25, 2008 10:39 AM
comment #14
storymark
says ...
"Shut up, Richardson, just shut up! Stop inferring that slime exists on both sides of the political divide. (I'd better not hear you pointing out that the Democrats, namely Al Gore, introduced the name Willie Horton during their '88 primary!)
Everybody knows that Democrats are sweet, harmless little kittens who work hard and play fair and are adorable when they rub against you. Conversely everybody knows that Republicans are big, scary monsters with fangs and forked tongues and yellow eyes and they live under your bed and will get you when you're sleeping and....."
I always find this kind of comment hilarious. Dems get angry all the time at the stuff Democratioc politicians pull. There is a great deal of anger over the current lack of action by the Dems in office, as one example.
It's Republicans who just cant seem to fall all over themselves quickly enough to defend and/or rationalize all the crap Rep. Politicians pull.
Posted by storymark
at June 25, 2008 10:57 AM
comment #15
D.Z.
says ...
Mgmax: Race-baiting was definitely a problem in American politics before Atwater, but the guy took it to a new level, by giving the media an excuse to downplay any genuine concerns and grievances[i.e. crack cocaine, apartheid, gang problems, etc.] in the community.
Before that ad, if a black person had his/her civil rights violated, or got killed, due to hate crimes, the public would not stand for it. After that ad, though, they were just viewed as sue-happy trouble-makers desperate for attention.
Walter: Gore just mentioned Horton; he didn't use his profile as an excuse to make an "all black people are dangerous" ad. Oh, and I'm surprised you agree with me on the Republicans.
Posted by D.Z.
at June 25, 2008 12:12 PM
comment #16
Walter Sobchak
says ...
Oh yes, the "all black people are dangerous" ad campaign. I forgot about that one. Thanks, Daniel!
If I remember, it featured video of black people, and then the voice-over said, "vote Republican, because all black people are dangerous". It was effective, you have to admit.
By the way, how about that lovely little spot the NAACP ran in 2000 featuring the daughter of James Byrd, saying, in effect, that Bush not signing a hate crime bill was like her father being dragged to death all over again. (nevermind that the rednecks who did it were executed). But hey, that ad was merely "hard-hitting".
Posted by Walter Sobchak
at June 25, 2008 12:53 PM
comment #17
D.Z.
says ...
Walter: "By the way, how about that lovely little spot the NAACP ran in 2000 featuring the daughter of James Byrd, saying, in effect, that Bush not signing a hate crime bill was like her father being dragged to death all over again. (nevermind that the rednecks who did it were executed). But hey, that ad was merely "hard-hitting"."
Yes, we don't need hate crime laws, because everyone who attacks someone based on their race gets their just deserts. Just look at what happened to the NYPD after they shot that guy at his bachelor party. Oh, wait...!
Posted by D.Z.
at June 25, 2008 1:14 PM
comment #18
D.Z.
says ...
Sorry, dessert. I'm a tad sleepy today.
Posted by D.Z.
at June 25, 2008 1:15 PM
comment #19
Richardson
says ...
"how about that lovely little spot the NAACP ran in 2000"
It's kind of intellectually dishonest to use an organization with specific, racially-based goals and compare it to the actions of the Republican Party. The NAACP doesn't speak for the Democrats, and frequently criticizes them. And naturally any ad they put up will be based on race.
That's not a defense of the ad, I just think that bringing it up in this context is kind of a non sequitur, unless the Democrats paid for the ad.
Posted by Richardson
at June 25, 2008 3:00 PM
comment #20
Walter Sobchak
says ...
By that measure, I'm sure you'll not accuse the Republican Party or Team Bush for the swiftboat ads in 2004, right? Afterall, those were produced by an independent group, not the RNC.
And the NAACP ALWAYS supports Democrats for federal office and the Byrd ads were aired in order to torpedo Bush during the 2000 election so it is relevant. And perhaps the DNC didn't pay for the ad but Democrats did.
Posted by Walter Sobchak
at June 25, 2008 5:34 PM
comment #21
LexG
says ...
Anyone here (other than I'm assuming Nicol D and Dirty Harry) ever visit that right-wing Liberty "film" blog? They were talking about this over there, worth checking out.
Those people are HARD FUCKING CORE, hardline, and often borderline insane. It's hardly a movie site at all, just a lot of seriously paranoid and unpleasant 'wingers bitching about any- and everything "liberal."
Posted by LexG
at June 25, 2008 7:22 PM
comment #22
PerfectTommy
says ...
LexG,
If you're talking about Liberty Film Festival's Libertas site, then Dirty Harry isn't around there any more. He was one of their regular bloggers but he was uncerimoniously booted and now is at www.dirtyharrysplace.com. Now two choices to meet your politically conservative film blog needs.
Posted by PerfectTommy
at June 25, 2008 11:03 PM
Post a comment