Upcoming
Mary
True Loved
October 22
Stranded, I Have Come From a Plane that Crashed on the Mountains
October 24
Dalton Trumbo's Johnny Got His Gun
High School Musical 3: Senior Year
Roadside Romeo
The Universe of Keith Haring
October 29
The First Basket
Rightie Underground
Five days ago Washington Times reporter Amy Fagan posted a piece about Friends of Abe, a group of "politically conservative and centrist Hollywood figures organized by actor Gary Sinise and others who've been meeting quietly in restaurants and private homes, forming a loose-knit network of entertainers who share common beliefs like supporting U.S. troops and traditional American values."
Gary Sinise, eh? Other members include Jon Voight, Pat Boone, Lionel Chetwynd and producer Craig Haffner, Fagan reports. Friends of Abe is "not a political action group," Haffner tells her. "People are gravitating to it because they love their country." And Barack Obama doesn't love this country? What a bunch of prissy, sanctimonious pricks these guys must be. They love an idea of this country that lives in their heads, I think they mean.
"Some of those involved are taking...public steps to counter the entertainment industry's tilt toward liberalism and Democratic politics," Fagan reports, "such as campaigning for Republican Sen. John McCain or crafting projects to portray America in a more positive light.
I wrote a similar (if much longer) piece for Los Angeles magazine in 1994 called "Right Face." The basic thrust was that Hollywood conservatives felt obliged to play their philosophical cards close to their chests, knowing full well they were a small minority in an overwhelmingly liberal town.
Here's page 1, page 2, page 3, page 4, page 5, page 6, page 7, page 8, page 9 and page 10.
Posted by Jeffrey Wells on July 29, 2008 at 3:34 PM
comment #1
BurmaShave says ...
Gary Sinise actually puts his money where his mouth is, aiding and visiting our troops on a regular basis. I actually shouldn't say the others don't, but I don't know.
Posted by BurmaShave at July 29, 2008 4:08 PM
comment #2
C-PhreekII says ...
By all means put as many old white guys on TV extolling the virtues of John McCain on TV as possible.
Posted by C-PhreekII at July 29, 2008 4:15 PM
comment #3
supertaster says ...
[What this site needs is a little Supertaster nostalgia. He's gone and we miss him already, but maybe somebody could throw together all his posts or posterity's sake?]
Posted by supertaster at July 29, 2008 4:19 PM
comment #4
p.Vice says ...
Isn't this kind of thing what they blacklisted a whole bunch of people for back in the 50s?
Posted by p.Vice at July 29, 2008 4:24 PM
comment #5
Mgmax says ...
Gary Sinise entertains the troops? What a pissy, sanctimonious prick. And I say that with full love for my country, even the low-thread county bubbas who opposed the Viet Cong and Che and other good guys.
Posted by Mgmax at July 29, 2008 4:35 PM
comment #6
Walter Sobchak says ...
Nice knowin' ya, Supertaster.
Prepare to feel the wrath of blacklisting in its modern incarnation as it invades your hind-quartered orifice.
Posted by Walter Sobchak at July 29, 2008 4:47 PM
comment #7
D.Z. says ...
Vice: No, they usually blacklisted people who didn't have the money and resources to defend themselves.
Posted by D.Z. at July 29, 2008 4:51 PM
comment #8
D.Z. says ...
Walter: Given that righties own more media than lefties, I'm
not sure why you should feel threatened.
Posted by D.Z. at July 29, 2008 4:56 PM
comment #9
The Hoyk says ...
Mg, are you saying Gary Sinise can't be entertaining? He was so the bomb in REINDEER GAMES.
Posted by The Hoyk at July 29, 2008 5:23 PM
comment #10
jc says ...
This is sounding like last week's Doonesbury strips. "Get me Hollywood stars for a McCain benefit!"
Posted by jc at July 29, 2008 5:24 PM
comment #11
nemo says ...
Pat Boone should help out McCain a lot with that crucial over-80 vote.
Posted by nemo at July 29, 2008 5:38 PM
comment #12
Mgmax says ...
Nemo wins this thread.
It's always funny to read the lists of conservative Hollywood stars-- what, is Bo Derek sitting this election out?
Posted by Mgmax at July 29, 2008 6:02 PM
comment #13
Griff says ...
"Are you now or have you ever been a Republican?"
"Have you no shame, sir?"
Posted by Griff at July 29, 2008 7:00 PM
comment #14
btwnproductions says ...
Sinise has always been a "Friends of Abe" kind of guy. I have no problem with that. It's Voight's transformation from an ashram-ish "seeker of truth" (his hippy-dippy movie AVATAR, for one thing) to a rightwinger that doesn't quite compute, but people change. He's older and crustier, seeking a new truth.
Posted by btwnproductions at July 29, 2008 7:42 PM
comment #15
The Bandsaw Vigilante says ...
Side-note-related, but a superb mailer was recently sent out from the AFL-CIO to its national members about Obama, whom they've endorsed debunking myths, etc..
If this is repeated nationally, it could make a lot of headway for Obama over McCain. It leads positively, rather than negatively, which is a big key to success with stuff like this:
http://www.nationaljournal.com/img/hotline/AFL08043_AFL_FINAL_FPO.pdf
Posted by The Bandsaw Vigilante at July 29, 2008 10:01 PM
comment #16
BurmaShave says ...
Michael Moore was really cruel to ambush Pat Boone like that.
Posted by BurmaShave at July 30, 2008 12:12 AM
comment #17
Mgmax says ...
Did anyone actually read Jeff's 1994 piece above?
It's the best comment on Jeff's 2008 hate...
Posted by Mgmax at July 30, 2008 5:25 AM
comment #18
tommysunshine says ...
Wellls, contrary to supertaster and the rest of the posturing freaks who gravitate towards this website even though they hate it- like pathetic gangster's molls with self-esteem issues- I want to see more of that yellow journalism up there. That article on republicans in hollywood was tremendous.
Posted by tommysunshine at July 30, 2008 5:48 AM
comment #19
Dave Polands Gut says ...
Damn that Sinise for actually having a viewpoint and actually caring. He should be hung in effigy.
Posted by Dave Polands Gut at July 30, 2008 5:57 AM
comment #20
supertaster says ...
[Would everyone please wish Supertaster happiness in his next life? I ask because he's a dead man around these parts.]
Posted by supertaster at July 30, 2008 6:31 AM
comment #21
JaySmack says ...
Sad to see Jon Voigt's name up there. Some people really oughta know better.
And if they're standing for "traditional" values, I have to wonder what that means. Sounds suspiciously like the kind of intelligent and humane ideas that are screamed constantly on Fox News.
Posted by JaySmack at July 30, 2008 6:59 AM
comment #22
tommysunshine says ...
Supertaster, you don't like what Wells does, then leave Hollywood Elsewhere and take your troupe of dim-witted clowns with you.
To paraphrase Leo Amery circa 1940, In the name of God Go!
Posted by tommysunshine at July 30, 2008 7:01 AM
comment #23
Mgmax says ...
That was tolerant of you, Tommy.
Posted by Mgmax at July 30, 2008 7:24 AM
comment #24
Mgmax says ...
Hey, wanna make your lefty Bush-hatin' head explode?
The first of what you're going to be seeing for the rest of your life: Bush revisionist articles. From Europe.
http://www.prospect-magazine.co.uk/article_details.php?id=10309
Posted by Mgmax at July 30, 2008 7:26 AM
comment #25
Richardson says ...
So, if you ignore the specific policies he implemented, the vast majority of which (by the author's admission) were total failures, and focus instead of the general intent, maybe he wasn't so bad?
It's interesting, to me, that the most they can point to Bush actually doing is making a slogan that worked. He ascribes virtually every positive thing that the administration "accomplished" back to that one slogan, and how that slogan alone inspired so many things to change. So, basically, one slogan is all it takes to be a good president?
I'd like to believe that history expects more than that.
Nevertheless, it's a good read.
Posted by Richardson at July 30, 2008 9:58 AM
comment #26
Mgmax says ...
"It's interesting, to me, that the most they can point to Bush actually doing is making a slogan that worked."
I think that doesn't really accurately convey the account Luttwak gives of the behind-the-scenes diplomacy Bush used to turn middle east governments around; just as only Nixon could go to China (because, as Gore Vidal reminded us, only Nixon wouldn't have Nixon at home calling you soft on Communism), only a Bush, only someone from that whole Carlyle Group in-bed-with-the-sheiks world, could go to Riyadh and Dubai and tell them, the era of winking at Arab zillionaires paying off the terrorists is over, time to pick a side, and if you pick the wrong one, we'll be freezing your assets ten minutes later. I've long thought that the people (like John Kerry) who said we should be treating this more like a law enforcement issue were being willfully blind to the whole law enforcement and diplomacy aspect obviously going on. Maybe the rubes could believe that Bush had us isolated in the world, but they should have known better how much of the war on terror was really happening in boardrooms and palaces.
That said, the point of bringing up the Luttwak piece had less to do with specifics (though it seems solid enough) than with the fact that, as I predicted a few months back, the low point for Bush's reputation has already been reached-- and it's only going up from now on.
Posted by Mgmax at July 30, 2008 11:09 AM
comment #27
supertaster says ...
As long as Wells can't figure out how to ban people, I will continue to come here to try, try, try to make him consider an alternative viewpoint JUST ONCE.
A man as filled with contempt, bitterness, and hatred, with such a warped sense of perspective as Wells should not be without his critics. In the irony of all ironies, he makes a living by critiquing the art of film in an effort to keep it honest and pure, yet holds himself above criticism. Why should his column be above reproach?
I didn't say anything about his mug, his hair, his waistsize or his age, I attacked his ideas. Shame on me.
Posted by supertaster at July 30, 2008 11:44 AM
comment #28
D.Z. says ...
Mgmax: "The first of what you're going to be seeing for the rest of your life: Bush revisionist articles. From Europe."
Murdoch's propaganda outfit at work again...?
", the era of winking at Arab zillionaires paying off the terrorists is over, time to pick a side, and if you pick the wrong one, we'll be freezing your assets ten minutes later."
But stoning women for being raped is fine and dandy.
"I've long thought that the people (like John Kerry) who said we should be treating this more like a law enforcement issue were being willfully blind to the whole law enforcement and diplomacy aspect obviously going on."
http://www.crooksandliars.com/2008/07/29/john-kerry-will-probably-accept-bushs-apology/#comments
Posted by D.Z. at July 30, 2008 1:01 PM
comment #29
SpinDozer says ...
' I predicted a few months back, the low point for Bush's reputation has already been reached-- and it's only going up from now on.'
Obviously, the nation has at least 50 million people who are dumb enough to build up Bushes rep through an enduring disinformation media campaign. Somehow I think that's a case of diminishing returns. Far more likely that the GOP will scapegoat his adm as an example of a bad apple, so that they can win an election. I guess Nixon wd be the closest comparison, doubt if his popularity ever went up by more than say 5 points after he left office.
I loved Luttwak's Grand Strategy of the Roman Empire, his understanding of the modern world ain't real impressive, though.
Posted by SpinDozer at July 30, 2008 7:39 PM
comment #30
D.Z. says ...
Spin: "Far more likely that the GOP will scapegoat his adm as an example of a bad apple, so that they can win an election."
Too bad no one's buying it like they did with Bush I, or the Republicans wouldn't be losing majorities in traditionally strong districts.
Posted by D.Z. at July 30, 2008 10:53 PM
Post a comment