And Now For Something Completely Different, Please
by Andrew BreitbartThis week’s Washington Times column:
As CPAC begins in the nation´s capital later this week, the conservative movement has much to contemplate as it attempts to reestablish itself as a dominant force in American political life.
Actually, “relevance” may be a more reasonable short-term goal.
The timing of the yearly Conservative Political Action Conference could not be better suited for evaluating the strategies of the standard bearers of free markets and limited government as free-spending and nanny statist Obamaism runs amok with nary a media check or a legislative balance.
Attendees of the wonky three-day forum should pay close attention to what their ideological counterparts had to say earlier in the week at their annual get-together in liberalism´s capital, Hollywood.
On Sunday night at the Kodak Theater, where Hillary Rodham Clinton and Barack Obama debated each other in front of the same prideful crowd a year earlier, the political left convened to celebrate its progressive political agenda. The Oscars communicate post-modern, post-American liberal values more effectively than elected Democratic officials themselves. The liberal establishment understands this and uses the glamorous Hollywood elite and its incessant stream of left-leaning product and promotional vehicles as its proxy messenger.
This year´s cause celebre was not the ailing American work force or the heroic and underappreciated U.S. military, but an attack on California´s just passed traditional marriage amendment – as represented by the white ribbon worn by pliant celebrity throngs. Dissenters in the midst dare not wear their contrarian ribbons for fear of more punitive Proposition 8 backlash.
You can read the column in full here.
Email this to a friend | Print |
Share on Facebook
| Tweet this
| 
Follow Us on Twitter
Subscribe via RSS
Got a Tip?
106 Comments
Let me be the first to say…RIGHT ON. The militant Hollywood guardians of Newspeak claim there is no sort of political discrimination prevalent in this town…yet. Rourke's break-thru-come-back tour-de-force role and Eastwood's wonderful portrayal ignored reflect a bias for all things Lefty in Tinseltown tonight. Let my people ago. Apparently Gay is the new Black. We shall overcome…what exactly?
We must “get it” and become as ruthless as the Dems. Hate to say it, but otherwise we are the suckers that play by the rules.
We need $$$ to hire PI’s and Public Relations people, smear the Dems, get media coverage by any means necessary. We need to get in the game! Where to send my money? Where to show up? Need people in the streets. We need to protest, get organized.
I will help, will you? somebody stop talking and get us out there in droves. Or be overcome.
Get the RnC to fight dirty instead of rolling over as we always do.
Tell me what to DO and stop complaining
I'm wondering about the "carbon footprint" of all these compassionate people.How'd they get to the Kodak? Did they walk? Or did they take the Metro. I mean, there's a station right downstairs.
Maybe they carpooled.
I think Al Gore pulled everyone around in a rickshaw
There has to be grassroots, concerted effort. We can't rely on "conservative" leaders, as a noted talk show host would say, it's going to be up to the people to drag them across the finish line.
That ultimate finish line has to be reclaiming a voice in the culture, not just one news network and some talk show hosts. Stories must be told, visions must be shaped and then it's off to education and the rest. We didn't lose this country overnight and we won't get it back overnight, but it can be done.
That means people have to find ways to be involved. The left has professionals at this, we'll have to do it with our amateurs. But I think every one of us is worth 10 of them. You can see it in the tax protests that are springing up.
"We didn't lose this country overnight"
Of course not. You lost it day by day, for the last 8 years. Do wingnuts never learn?
I'm not for casting you out. Instead, think of it as the Oscars. You've been invited. You get out your nicest tux, shine your shoes, and get out your most charming jokes. You leave that part of yourself that likes to throw popcorn at the announcers for TV football, and thinks that wandering around the house in ten year old bunny slippers is a good way to spend a Saturday morning. Bring your Conservatism to the Party, leave the rest at home.
McCain, Dole, and GW Sr. have two things in common–they are RINOs and they lost. Bold, unabashed, Happy Warrior Conservatives win. RINOs lose. So we 'idealogues' who tend to be more flexible than the RINOs have no choice. We can lose by letting the RINOs do it again, or we can fight the RINOs, and hope for victory.
[...] Big Hollywood wrote an interesting post today on And Now For Something Completely Different, PleaseHere’s a quick excerptby Andrew Breitbart This week’s Washington Times column:As CPAC begins in the nation´s capital later this week, the conservative movement has much to contemplate as it attempts to reestablish itself as a dominant force in American political life.Actually, “relevance” may be a more reasonable short-term goal.The timing of the yearly Conservative Political Action Conference could not be better suited for evaluating the strategies of the standard bearers of free marke [...]
[...] Big Hollywood wrote an interesting post today on And Now For Something Completely Different, PleaseHere’s a quick excerptby Andrew Breitbart This week’s Washington Times column:As CPAC begins in the nation´s capital later this week, the conservative movement has much to contemplate as it attempts to reestablish itself as a dominant force in American political life.Actually, “relevance” may be a more reasonable short-term goal.The timing of the yearly Conservative Political Action Conference could not be better suited for evaluating the strategies of the standard bearers of free marke [...]
The liberals NEVER compromise on what they believe. They want to destroy Conservatism. Bi-Partisan is liberalspeak for" Conservatives must surrender or compromise what they believe". Would that the spineless weenies on our side had the same courage of OUR convictions.
Did you see the mortgage bailout protest by the traders on CNBC this week? If McCain had won, it would have been his name they were calling out, because he supported the same action during his campaign. Then, the Republicans would be spending another four years policy-hopping between whatever economic theory"felt" right, or whatever massive social program they wanted to experiment with that week. Meanwhile, the party would continue its ideological dissolution.
At least with Obama charging the windmill, he has defined the philosophical boundaries for Republicans in congress. It's sad that it took destructive policy to do it, but at least now they're getting a clue as to what their constituents get fired up about.
PIs? Smearing people? Why do that when doing things the honorable way is even easier? Here's my guide for reducing illegal immigration through various forms of relatively easy – and honorable – political action. To a great extent, that can be applied to other issues, just as long as it's something that your opponents frequently lie about.
As for the column linked in the post, be very, very careful what you wish for.
FTA: The millionaires and billionaires who feed the conservative think tanks and underwrite those who run for office need to join their high-rolling liberal brethren like Barry Diller and David Geffen and realize their political dollars are better spent making movies and nurturing the culture.
The last thing anyone should want is the people discussed here making movies. Of course, if they did "Battlefield Ayn Rand" would probably become a new joke so it might work out.
I hope we don't need to stoop to their level. That said, I get where you're coming from. We have to stop trying to get along and placate the left. Who cares what they think? They're ruining this country. We do need to be a heck of a lot more vocal and show some backbone for a change.
I read something once (can't source it so take with a grain of salt) that said most people define themselves as moderate. Many leaning conservative on financial issues and liberal on social issues, often being swayed to vote one party or another over one or two issues (abortion among them).
Seems to me that you have a valid point here. I'm not sure what issues conservatives can latch onto and make our own, though the massive socialist spending by Obama seems like a good place to start. I have no doubt that if the Republican party can find a coherent message that appeals to moderate people in this country the party would find itself on much more solid footing and it a good place to take some senate seats in two years.
What to do politically:
We need DEEDS now, not just words. Calling talk radio stations doesn't DO anything. Twittering and ranting in chat rooms about what's happening doesn't DO much. The only reason I’m posting this here is in hopes YOU, who are reading this, will consider DOING SOMETHING MEANINGFUL to change your government back to its Constitutional limits. To DO that, we need to strengthen and change the Republican Party back to its Reagan era strength. How do WE do that? The BEST way to strengthen and change the Republican Party into one that again clearly advocates conservative principles is to . . . drum roll . . . HAVE MORE PEOPLE IN ITS RANKS who accept, understand and advocate conservative principles. I'm not talking about just registering as a Republican, I'm talking about YOU, yes, YOU, who's reading this, not "the other guy," but YOU — becoming an A REAL, ACTIVE MEMBER of the Republican Party by becoming a real, live, functioning Precinct Committeeman. That's the bottom rung on the leadership ladder in the Party. By becoming a Precinct Committeeman, you get to ACTUALLY VOTE for the Party leadership. YOU GET TO CAST A VOTE FOR YOUR LOCAL REPUBLICAN LEADERS UP TO THE COUNTY LEVEL, AND THEN GET TO ELECT ELECTORS WHO ELECT THE STATE AND NATIONAL PARTY LEADERS. If those who accept, understand and advocate conservative principles become a majority IN THE PARTY RANKS, guess what? The Party leadership voted in will be those who accept, understand and advocate conservative principles. This just happened here in Arizona.
It's not hard to find out how to become a Precinct Committeeman. Do some googling to find your county Republican Party web site. Find out which Legislative District you live in. Find out when the next meeting of that Legislative District Committee meets. Then go to the meeting and tell the chairman you want to volunteer to be a Precinct Committeeman. You'll have to gather a few signatures to get on the ballot. Once the election comes around, you'll be elected. Meanwhile, volunteer to DO SOMETHING in support of your conservative values and principles WITHIN THE PARTY. You will be leading by example. Many of the moderates are moderates because they don't know how to think and be conservative. You can show them by your DEEDS.
Now get to it!
P.S. “These are the times that try men's souls. The summer soldier and the sunshine patriot will, in this crisis, shrink from the service of their country; but he that stands by it now, deserves the love and thanks of man and woman. Tyranny, like hell, is not easily conquered; yet we have this consolation with us, that the harder the conflict, the more glorious the triumph. What we obtain too cheap, we esteem too lightly: it is dearness only that gives every thing its value. Heaven knows how to put a proper price upon its goods; and it would be strange indeed if so celestial an article as FREEDOM should not be highly rated.”
Thomas Paine, December 23, 1776, The Crisis.
I disagree somewhat. Republicans put their money on a moderate last time which was also partly due to moderates and liberals voting in the primaries. The traditional Republican base of conservatives did not get fired up whatsoever until Palin was on the ticket. I never interpreted the message as being, "Shut up and do what we say." In all honesty, I think the reason they failed was because of the headliner of the ticket, the campaign he wanted to run, and his political history. Prior military service, while respectable, will only get you so far in politics. Now if you put a real conservative candidate with the history to match up, then you'll have a winner. It is entirely possible that I'm misinterpreting your comment though, and I apologize if I am, but I do strongly disagree that appealing to moderates is the formula for success. I do agree that conservatism needs to be articulated better by future candidates though.
While your recommendation is quite sound and I agree whole-heartedly, Rahm taking the census into the White House will most likely alter precincts in favor of Democrats simply by shifting lines on a map around blue areas. Stronger action will probably be needed, but what you have out-lined is a step in the right direction. Kudos.
I wish I had more room to expres my thoughts, so this will be a 2-part reply.
I disagree. When the primaries were on, many voters still recalled the fiasco of immigration reform with McCain's name all over it. I do agree that Romney being a Mormon hurt him politically. (Thinking back to Kennedy and his Roman Catholicism, but even he still won.) The real issue with appealing to moderates using a moderate message, is that tried and true ideas get watered down in the process. History showed us with Reagan, that conservatism, when articulated and practiced well, wins out amongst all. Going back to the polling, McCain was always trailing Obama and never got his first lead until Palin joined the ticket. I agree that he ran a bad campaign, but it's also hard to run a good one as Republican when you focus on your ability to "reach across the aisle" vs. staying focused on issues people care about.
Before I became more interested in politics, I identified myself as an independent. After years of providing for myself, paying taxes, and just plain living, I realized that my values were conservative. My current problem is that the Republican party has been talking about abandoning their conservative values in favor of being more moderate. I know doing such a thing would cause them to lose my support and many of my co-workers (not to mention countless others I don't even know). But, with the lack of transparency on legislation (promised by Obama) and shutting out of the minority party, I see no logic in trying to appeal and/or compromise. I can also appreciate if you don't have a party that properly represents your views, but only you and like-minded people have the power to do something about that. (I have the feeling that true conservatives may find themselves in that position if things continue as they are.) Current legislation is angering the people that pay taxes back to the government, and is failing the people that keep this country going. There are only 2 parties in the USA with the power to get elected to important roles in the government. I would like more choices, but that's the current reality in which we live.
alot of the comments above presume that there was a level playing field and that McCain lost to Obama based on policies or tactics.
the reality is that money wins elections. Obama raised a shocking amount of money. some $700M+ by all accounts. Much of it probably illegally raised, but since nobody wants to investigate that little detail, it seems he got away with it. with $700M+ in the bank and running against the foolish senator who championed public financing of elections and the squelching of political speech (i.e. campaign finance reform), Obama had an advantage that could not be overcome. While McCain had to carefully allocate his resources around the country, Obama literally had the funds to compete everywhere… even in states that should have been "locks" for McCain. i'm in Colorado, and this was considered a swing state even though it had voted for Bush the previous 2 times. it swung to Obama this time because he had the money to run ads on TV nearly continuously here. McCain's TV presence was not nearly as influential.
quite simply put, Obama had the money to reach every dumb voter that he needed to. he told each dumb voter exactly what they wanted to hear in 30 second soundbites. that's how he won.
conservatives need an effective strategy to combat that sort of media advantage, while at the same time combatting the election shenanigans being perfected by groups like ACORN and others. i'm not sure it can be done. we may have to wait until Obama and his cabal destroys this country before we see another republican congress and republican president at the same time, but by then it might be too late.
$600 million, mainstream media plus all of Hollywood got President Obama elected; everyone else just went along for the ride.
Add the " Stimulated 24/7 Get Out the Democrat Vote" package recently signed by President Obama and this is how one-political party monopoly is created.
Moderates, attacking Conservatives is one reason why so many non-political were bamboozled by the most brilliant Confidence game ever play.
Most importantly, moderate voters….you weren't educated on the issues or the candidate.
For example, how was it possible that a MAJORITY of practicing Catholics ended up putting into power the candidate who was more extreme than NARAL? Because very few were even aware of President Obama's extreme positions.
The fact is the majority of Americans who voted for President Obama had absolutely no idea who or what they voted into power.
They are now just finding out because President Obama is directly affecting their own personal wallets; these non-political independent voters were led to believe that 95% of Americans would be receiving a tax cut not have 95% of their own personal wealth taxed.
Reality always hits hard when it becomes personal; the 92% of Americans who sacrifice to pay their bills are not at all happy that instead of the tax cuts they are instead forced to pay the bills for the 8% who benefit from a rigged system.
The predictors of this election were in the tank before the primaries were ever finished. Regardless of approval numbers, it was largely the ineffectiveness of the democratic congress that caused Bush's ratings to be what they were. However, Bush was never vocal in defense of his actions which will also be his downfall in the history books if left to their current trends. This election proved that most Americans believe the MSM/ Democrats when they put the success (or failure) of the USA on the shoulders of the President. This exhibits a poor understanding of how our government was designed to work by the founding fathers and further demonstrates the failures of public schooling. I'm not apologizing for Bush, but there is a much larger picture for which he does not deserve most of the blame.
And why are multi-millionairres who pretend to be other people for a living bad-mouthing capitalism again?
Instead of constantly trying to placate the left, Republican leaders need to consistently stick to their principles and voters will follow. Regarding the Academy Awards, maybe it's time conservative filmmakers and actors start their own awards show. Who wants to be associated with the Oscars anyway? If the declining viewership is any indication, certainly much of the public doesn't.
http://the100mostannoyingthings.blogspot.com/
There are grassroots efforts beginning. Protests have begun around the nation but they need people to help, support, get involved and stay enthused for them to keep growing and have some impact. For example, a single woman named Amanda started a viral internet effort out here early last week. By weeks end, she had the support of two local talk shows and Malkin who is linking to other similar protests going on around the country.
We got upwards of 750 people on a Saturday morning in less than a week in 23-25 degree temperatures to protest what the Admin and Congress have been doing, and the seeming unwillingness of our elected reps to listen. This coming Saturday, there is a tea party at a local fountain and a march.
But none of this will do much if we don't continue to coalesce into a network and support each other. The time for bickering about doing something is indeed done.
Des,
You are more of a Conservative/Republican than you think:
"I am not bound to win, but I am bound to be true. I am not bound to succeed, but I am bound to live by the light that I have. I must stand with anybody that stands right, and stand with him while he is right, and part with him when he goes wrong."
– Abrahan Lincoln
I too have issues with some of the elite attitude/process from the "Power Republicans" – there is a disconnect with their ability to message. I see things more simply – in most of my discussions with all people – when you get past all of our talking points – it all comes down to certain levels of Conservative Thought. I too am an Indespendent based on the "Professional Politician" aspects of the GOP.
Conservatism is the key. In still believe Americans are inherently conservative, and given the right candidate will rise up and take this country back. I personally know a half dozen people that didn’t vote out of disgust about McCain, at the beginning I was one. I came around with Sarah Palin, and then tried to convince these same people to vote to no avail. Will the economy in a, “convenient” spiral, Barry should have won by a landslide. I heard Bill Bennett say on a show to paraphrase, “If we could have resurrected Reagan he would have probably lost with this economy. Throw the bums out has been an American truism since it’s founding. Those same people that didn’t vote in this last cycle are all producers and pay taxes, and are now saying, “oh $hit!” Find a conservative and the troops will rally, money, time, stay in the town square, etc., just my thoughts?
If you're going to name-call, why even bother posting? People will actually consider what you have to say if you say it reasonably and respectfully. But you're not here for dialogue are you? Just a drive-by. You might as well be spitting into the wind.
I think there will never be a better opportunity for a fast turnaround. The next two elections have the potential for great change, but Republicans are going to have to get over their little internal war. Rudy would have been a great candidate, but he got sabotaged by the Religious Right (as did Romney and to an extent, McCain). I mentioned Rudy on another thread and a Conservative replied scornfully, proclaiming he was, "Democrat light." Yeah, Conservative on spending, tax cuts, the military, crime, the border, etc….but he was no better than Obama? You have your primaries to pick the best guy, then you push him/her hard. I read hundreds of posts and heard countless talk show callers saying from the start that they wouldn't vote for McCain….that he'd "destroy" the party. Well, we're 4 weeks into the Obama administration and we have a lifetime of debt, talks of deep cuts to the military, the closing of GITMO, softening towards Islamic militants, throwing away of abortion restrictions…..Man, I wonder what "Democratic light" would look like right now?
Ideologues don't make the party stronger by refusing to compromise….they weaken it by undermining decent candidates who can show the party has a range of important objectives, not two or three big ones that everyone must agree on or be cast out of the party as heretics.
Well, Des, you can thank the radical Christianists in your own party for Romney's downfall.
Bush's ratings were tanking BEFORE 2006, which is actually when he lost Congress. Bush had a completely Republican Congress, and screwed the pooch long long long before Pelosi, et. all took the reigns
So I can join as long as I'm willing to ignore everything I might believe in? If that's your plan, I'll stay in the middle. In the last 2 elections, only 30% (give or take) identified themselves as Conservatives, and that includes people like McCain (who firmly believes he IS a Conservative). You're welcome to believe anything you want and try to vote for people who support those beliefs, but if you expect people like me to support them when you're telling me to be a good little robot and go along with whatever you tell me to do……then no thanks.
It's interesting that so many Conservatives refuse to compromise on virtually anything, but fully expect the rest of us to walk away from our own opinions without complaint. You don't have to take my word for it, just look at the numbers…..they don't lie. You firmly have around 25 – 30% of the vote locked up. If that's where the party goes (with an F-you to anyone who doesn't walk in lock step), then I think it's pretty obvious where this country will head.
"I read something once (can't source it so take with a grain of salt) that said most people define themselves as moderate. Many leaning conservative on financial issues and liberal on social issues, often being swayed to vote one party or another over one or two issues (abortion among them). "
Welcome to my world! I'm a little more liberal with social issues like abortion (not as much as Obama, though) and gay marriage but conservative with money, affirmative action (read: I don't like it), and I'm soooooo for the death penalty, hell I'm for cruel and unusual punishment if the crime warrants it.
Come to think of it, with the exception of abortion and gay marriage, I pretty much lean center to center-right on most other issues. Most of my relatives are left-to-right-leaning Democrats and maybe this all comes from upbringing. My parents taught me things like hard work, getting an honest day's pay, and not blaming anyone else (i.e.: the government) for my own problems.
My dad took me to a gun show recently (I wisely chose NOT to wear my NPR t-shirt)
One of my cousins thought it was disgusting. "How could you go to that?" she asked. "I had nothing else to do and I've never been to one before" was my answer.
Andrew, the new conservative revolution has already begun! It starts under a liberal/Democratic president, like a Jimmy Carter! I'm a member of the UCLA Bruin Republicans, and my fellow students are firm believers in the value of conservatism, and the need to campaign for better leadership.
While I must admit that most of fellow students are not (yet) part of the communications field, we are making some progress! I'm studying Film & TV as a Grad Student at UCLA, and I know there are more like me out there!
A few years ago, I saw a speech by Ann Coulter where she stated the importance of young conservatives joining the media fields. That one speech helped change my life, because I had not originally intended to go further than an undergrad in Film Studies. That speech got me to LA, the heart of the business.
We need more YC's to join the field! I know you'll press this point at CPAC, and I can't wait to hear it!
I agree that the Republican leaders need to stick with OUR principles. As for the Oscars…. Last time I watched was when Titanic won for best picture. I don't watch it because too many of the actors are so full of themselves. I wouldn't want Conservative filmmakers and actors to go the same way.
Maybe, but Liberals are only 20% of the vote (far less than Conservatives)…..a minority in their own party. That's why Democrats who succeed are mostly the ones who move to the middle. I think Republicans need to stop worrying about Liberals, and start thinking about the 50% that is neither Liberal nor Conservative. They don't need to pander, but they also should avoid the, "Shut up and do what we say," approach. I think they have the superior arguments (for the most part), they just need to learn better strategy and how to articulate them better (plus the politicians living by their ideals would be a good start as well).
Romney, was as close to a conservative we had, save, “Palin.” Did you see his withdrawal speech, brilliant. If he had of come out with that tone earlier, I believe he would have swept the nation.
bipartisan = bigger government
Amen to that column with regards to the problem.
Actually, McCain's position was different (although I admit similarly distasteful to true economic Conservatives). He has been firmly (and loudly) against both the economic stimulus and the housing plan. I agree he wouldn't have been a perfect president, but then again I really disliked many of the things George Bush did as well (but I still supported him as much as I could, and always respected him).
I agree that Obama being Obama (along with Pelosi & Reid leading Congress) will present a better opportunity for a quick turnover, but it will also leave us with a legacy of things that will take decades to undo (including Supreme Court Justices). One more election with a President that Conservatives were less than ecstatic about would have given us a Conservative court for at least 10 – 15 years. Now the best we can hope for is a balanced court that gives us rulings like they did with the GITMO detainees. I get where you're coming from, I just think it's too big a loss to endure…..especially if Iran gets nuclear bombs.
I've heard a lot of suggestions that the answer is to throw out the conservatives like Palin or Jindal, and today Randy Barnett on Volokh announced that no demonstrably "creationist" politician will ever be elected. Well that depends, doesn't it? It depends if the non-25-30% feel that it's utterly necessary to be rude to people about their beliefs in order to get the popular kids to like them. It depends on if any sympathetic statement by a politician that allows those 25-30% to feel welcome is portrayed by the media as indications of a full-blown theocratic terror threat.
Do we have a religious test for President? It seems that we do. Democrats have to make nice "I'm a Christian" noises that no one believes, and Republicans have to eschew any possible color of faith… according to some, or they're a threat to our very freedom.
What would inclusiveness look like?
What does a "compromise" look like?
Do people have to violate their personal beliefs in order to work together on anything? Is there really not room to include people of diverse and strong opinions without insisting that it's impossible to get along *unless* everyone walks in lock step? Why *should* conservatives compromise? Why *is* compromise seen as a necessary component of cooperation?
Romney was the invisible man. His Mormonism was the most interesting thing about him. He looked like a Ken doll. Granted, we can be sorry about this now, but there is little point to it.
I doubt that any Republican could have won the last election. McCain had always been an outsider to the party and known for being Moderate, and he got the primary votes. But every bit of glossy Obama mailings I got had Bush front and center. McCain was the new Bush… and that would have been true of any Republican candidate. I liked Fred. I really liked Giuliani. I like to think that Giuliani could have won (and he might have been as good as Romney right now… but wishful thinking is futile) but either of those men would have been portrayed as the new Bush.
Obama ran for President against Bush and he won.
The radical Christianists or… the media that was obsessed with the radical Christianists? Maybe it was the people who made up the word "Christianist" because the word "Christian" didn't sound scary enough.
The "thing" about the primary system is that people don't vote for the person they most like, they vote for the person that they think OTHER people will vote for… the person who can win.
Convince enough people that OTHER people will not vote for Giuliani or that OTHER people will not vote for Romney… and they don't get the nomination.
Guilt.
If he'd been the Republican candidate when everything crashed right before the election he might have been able to pull it off, being a grown-up and all, and having a clue.
But it would still have been difficult, because the entirety of Obama's campaign budget would have been equating Romney to Bush.
OTOH, if someone wants to set up a mentoring system for conservatives wanting to script-write or otherwise get into the movie making business… that would be cool.
Still, if the goal is to become self-righteous scolds like the liberals seem to be as they pursue some validation… that would be boring.
"The movie stars and the powerful creative minds congratulating each other Sunday night wield a greater role in shaping the political landscape than Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid combined."
Isn't the answer to this problem found at the box office?
Des I like Rudy but as a GUN OWNER and an ant Abortion Catholic I'd say the people who were shy of him were right to be. The base is the base, you can't win without us. Democrate light he isn't. But he does need to make up big time with the gun owners and the pro lifers. Bishop Raymond Burke stated he wouldn't give communion to any politician who supported abortion. Burke is right in this instance. You need the religious right……I would think the more liberal (literally liberal) leaning conservatives could walk taht distance. Why should religious conservatives not stand on their principals?
Christianists are the people who want the Federal Government to impose their extreme view of Christianity as the law of the land. Christianists are the ones so freaked out by religions different than theirs that they more or less forced poor Romney to give a speech virtually apologizing for being a Mormon. Christianists are the people who threaten businesses that don't reflexively say "Merry Christmas" or sufficiently kiss their religious backsides.
Lola, this election certainly showed that you can't win with ONLY your base.
As for your last quote "Why should religious conservatives not stand on their principals?", I don't see what good would be served by standing on top of people who run your local schools.
You might find that it will be easier to attract people to your cause if you spell words correctly once in a while.
Box office is actually up this year. By the way, how exactly are you including the filmmakers of Slumdog Millionaire as part of your political rantings?
I saw Ann Coulter once condemn 9/11 widows, demanding that they shut up.
I'm not ranting. I don't rant before 3:45 p.m. weekdays, 12 p.m. weekends.
Ann Coulter was criticizing the women known as The Jersey Girls, not ALL 9/11 widows. She also never "demanded that they shut up," but I guess you were just paraphrasing to save space, right? You even make her point for her that the liberals tend to put up people who you aren't allowed to criticize without being called heartless.
Not you personally, but for the last couple of months, this site has been putting forth the fiction that the Oscars would be nothing but a Bash Bush/Bash America anti-conservative hatefest. I'm simply pointing out that the film that actually WON 8 Oscars had absolutely nothing to do with either American society or American politics. Apart from the statements of the two winners of Milk and Bill Maher's unfunny appearance, it was a fairly apolitical show. But I guess it's easier for some people to stand by their carefully crafted image of what actually goes on at the ceremony rather than acknowledge reality once in a while.
Oh, by the way, ratings for the show were up 6%. Considering the venting of spleens over the TDK snub in two categories, the ratings didn't drop.
Um. The film that won 8 Oscars had absolutely NOTHING to do with American politics.
Yes, quite. Scary word.
And a revelation of extreme disconnect with anything resembling reality.
It's only in fantasy land that "Christianists" want, or have the ability to get the Federal Government to impose anything at all because the ONE trait of Christian true believers is that they refuse to bow to any other authority.
It was never the atheists or social Christians who pushed for religious separation from the Government in the United States, but the true believers… those who refused to have some OTHER Christian in authority over them. Anyone who cares about doctrinal purity is BY DEFINITION not a team player, not a joiner, not going to stand for a moment having some other true believer who is wrong and going to hell in moral authority over them.
Abortion and the dissolution of marriage aren't religious, and are certainly not *doctrinal* issues. That those scary Christianists don't think it's right to kill inconvenient persons (and faith is NOT required to argue the personhood, the unique *living* human organism, of the not-yet-born) and are concerned about social stability, says nothing of their ability to cooperate on issues that actually ARE religious.
The rest is just freedom… assuming you think freedom is a good thing.
"this site has been putting forth the fiction that the Oscars would be nothing but a Bash Bush/Bash America anti-conservative hatefest"
People on this site have a right to post an opinion (you, for instance). I'm sure we can agree that none (most?) of us cannot ACTUALLY predict the future, so any hatefest predictions were simply fears of what might be. Maybe all the uproar about it actually served to curb some of the hatefest atmosphere before it started.
And, I wasn't singling out any movies, I was saying that conservatives may want to use their voice at the box office more wisely, in regards to ticket purchases.
The Liberals voting in the primaries thing was a complete canard….a gimmick played by Conservative talk show hosts to whip up the base (and coincidentally, their ratings). Even with the Republican race over and daily encouragement from several prominent hosts, the crossover the other way was negligible (and don't forget that many states require you to only vote for the party you are registered in, which would have happened long before). Romney advocates liked to chirp about the conspiracy theories, but the truth is that there is a sizable number of Christian Conservatives who refused to vote for him because of his religion (and the fact that he had been a fairly Liberal Governor).
I also think the unwavering belief that the Republicans lost because they didn't have a "strong Conservative" is wishful thinking. Michael Medved pointed out that in many districts where Conservatives ran, McCain scored a higher percentage of the vote. Also, he attracted some Moderates who would have been equally as reticent to vote for a Conservative as they would a Liberal. Obama being so charismatic and the first Black nominee could easily have taken a larger percentage of that vote, leaving the Republicans with an even bigger defeat. That might not be the case in 3 years because people will be jaded about Obama breaking so many campaign promises and his very real tilt to the Left that he tried so hard to hide the last time around. McCain ran a bad, disorganized campaign, and still was leading when the bottom dropped out of the economy. Other than an economics guy like Romney, I find it hard to believe anyone could have pulled this one out (although as a complete hypothetical, anything is possible).
I hope that someday we get off this nonsense about Moderates just being people who, "can't make up their mind." As a Moderate, I educate myself on every issue I can, listen to both sides (and gradations in the middle), then come to individual decisions to the best of my ability. My refusing to put blind faith into any single group of leaders is hardly a sign that I can't make up my mind. I call myself a Moderate because on some issues I'm Conservative, some in the middle, and some on the Left. Moderate is the only label I have available, but it doesn't describe a specific platform, as does Conservative or Liberal (or Libertarian). Would it be nice to be in a group where everyone could assure me how correct I was on issues. Sure. Do I have any desire to do so? No. If I disagree with someone on an issue, I will actually listen to them and seriously consider their opinion. I don't see that as a weakness.
Excuse me Orwell…but Obama won by keeping his base. you know the psycho lunatic fringe leftist kooks? Yep. I find it the height of arrogance for anyone to look down their noses at people who STAND ON THEIR PRINCIPALS! People Orwell doesn't know what principal means. Another paragon of our Public Education system. Of course Orly are too stupid to understand a bloody word I just said but considering that we will let it go. And Orwell…..remember this little bit of advice…you chose to be stupid. OK? You gotta live with it now. Dontcha! AWESOME!
Unless I am talking to a moronic college student……or should I say, brain washed peon.
But when people's fears of the future are often presented as authoritative statements, that becomes problematic. Frankly, the vast majority of Oscar broadcasts are apolitical. But, whoa Nelly, Susan Sarandon says something about Haiti in the mid 1990's and that gets morphed into "Susan Sarandon shows up to the Oscars every year and screams about Bush".
My guess is next year, even though the "political" portion of the Oscarcast was two speeches from the Milk winners and Bill Maher's unfortunate appearance, MANY people will be kvetching about how the 2009 Oscarcast was a liberal hatefest that ranted all night about gay marriage. They have the right to post that, of course, but they'll be wrong.
Again I site your statement:
"this site has been putting forth the fiction that the Oscars would be nothing but a Bash Bush/Bash America anti-conservative hatefest"
Aren't you being authoritative yourself, painting those on this site with a very broad brush? This to me is just as problematic, I'm afraid.
Cross-selling across the company media. The book publishers own the newspapers own the film studios and the employees are overwhelmingly "in the tank", so the awards shows look like the front pages look like the NYT Book reviews look like the talking points the employees got from the Kos that morning. If Soros feels it, the chatter reflects it. It's looks like the sixty foot face,only there's a proportional body attached and that is the Goliath that we face. We do so with one or two news channels (all cable), a couple of newspapers (all business rags), and AM radio. The mountaintop is covered in fog from here. About all we can hope for are seismic events that literally shake the ground beneath us all. Let's just hope that those events aren't too traumatic. Then again, they used Katrina and then forgot it.
A "principal" is the person who runs the school. A "principle" is an ideal or standard belief.
I'm incredibly amused that you reacted to my correction of your grammar by continuing to use the incorrect word. Seriously, just admit that you made a mistake. Oh, that's right, Republicans NEVER admit mistakes.
By the way, are you clear on difference between "lose" and "loose"? For instance, if something isn't secured properly, it's "loose". If an political party bases its entire campaign exclusively on its extreme "base" and makes no effort to bring in moderate or independent voters, it's bound to "lose".
Thanks for the feedback. Will you become a precinct committeeman?
Hollywood is about making money. The entertainment industry culture will change only when conservative films are box office hits and liberal films flop.
Orwell,
Ronald Reagan is a great example of a Republican who energized the base and won over new voters (e.g., Reagan Democrats).
How did Reagan do this? By standing by his principles and effectively articulating them to voters, hardcore Republican or not.
Smart Republicans are returning to Reagan's strategy. For example, newbie Republican Anh Cao soundly defeated long-time Democrat William Jefferson in a Louisiana Congressional race. A big reason for Cao's success was his unapologetically Christian, pro-life, and pro-marriage views.
Read more here:
http://www.onenewsnow.com/Election2008/Default.as...
Principles DO matter if a Republican wants to win votes.
Actually, Reagan used wedge issues and played groups off of each other to poach voters. He went to Philadelphia, Mississippi, the site of the infamous 1964 Civil Right Murders, and gave a speech on "State's Rights", you know the same "principle" that the killers of the Civil Rights workers thought that they were upholding. Reagan forged his coalition on angry white Southern voters that thought their democratic party abandoned them by embracing Civil Rights.
Reagan got lucky when the economy rebounded, because his trickle down economics didn't work. Tripling the defense budget isn't exactly "cutting spending", as a result, Reagan tripled the deficit.
Speaking of "principles", Ronnie sure talked tough about Iran, but then sold them weapons in order to circumvent Federal Law about the Contras.
Orwell: You come on this site and insult people, without any real point. Are you a little school teacher? You’re so clever with your spell check acumen. But, what really interests me is, “ what’s in it for you? Why do you hit your knee’s for Barry, and deify a politician? Why do you love Washington government so? Again, what’s in it for you?
Erasmus,
If you look deeper at the box office numbers, you'll notice that the most successful films glamorized conservative values like traditional family, religious faith (especially Christianity), capitalism, free speech, and a strong military.
The following links underscore this point:
http://abcnews.go.com/Entertainment/Story?id=5941...
http://bighollywood.breitbart.com/stkarnick/2009/...
In short, conservative values are winning at the box office despite Hollywood's attempts to ignore or vilify them.
And conservatism is the new Native American. Beware strangers with blankets….
aharris
You may want to talk with Tim Johnson, who is also involved in the grassroots revival of the GOP. Read the story here:
http://www.bookerrising.net/2009/02/timothy-johns...
One more thing.
I like the GOP principles that Johnson and his allies have written up:
• We believe that the strength of our nation lies with the individual and that each person’s dignity, freedom, ability and responsibility must be honored.
• We believe in equal rights, equal justice and equal opportunity for all, regardless of race, creed, sex, age or disability.
• We believe in free enterprise and that encouraging individual initiative will continue to bring this nation opportunity, economic growth and prosperity.
• We believe government must practice fiscal responsibility and allow individuals to keep more of the money they earn.
• We believe the proper role of government is to provide for the people only those critical functions that cannot be performed by individuals or private organizations and that the best government is that which governs least.
• We believe the most effective, responsible and responsive government is government closest to the people.
• We believe America must retain the principles that have made us strong while developing new and innovative ideas to meet the challenges of changing times.
• We believe in American values and that we should preserve our national strength and pride while working to extend peace, freedom and human rights throughout the world.
• We believe the Republican Party is the best vehicle for translating these ideals into positive and successful principles of government.
If punishment isn't unusual, it serves no point. Personally, I'm for public flogging. Pain is a great motivator. If the government really wants to take the job of parenting on themselves, they're going to need to learn how to discipline effectively.
That's the way it is now. Dark Knight, 300…huge hits. Redacted, Lions for Lambs, not so much. In fact, without conservative movies made by conservatives they wouldn't be able to make their liberal movies. Let's hope for the day when Frank Miller and Sam Raimi (both conservatives) start their own studio and let the other Hollywood types sit and spin.
Considering most businesses get Christmas off, and not Winter Solstice, I don't think it's a stretch for people to say "Merry Christmas." Is it a big deal in and of itself? Probably not, but it represents an insidious secularization of society.
I'm not a "Christianist." But I do feel like a business should kiss my backside, religious or otherwise. My backside is where the pocket is that I keep my money. If they want my money, they'll kiss it. The customer is always right, and if a store is not willing to make me feel like a valued customer, then I can and will take my business to someone who will.
Andrew makes the same argument, but I just don't buy it. This election cycle was predicted by everyone to be a major victory by the Dems (Clinton or Obama). You had an unpopular war, a sluggish economy, a hostile media, and a President who sometime early in his administration decided that selling his policies to the people (or even defending himself and Republicans from baseless charges) wasn't worth the effort. Eight years of a Republican President, ending with him having the lowest approval numbers ever. Throughout it all, McCain stayed close. Even when he made numerous mistakes and failed to capitalize on the strong parts of Conservatism (including talk radio and Fox News), he stayed close. He pulled ahead after Palin energized the convention, then the bottom fell out of the economy. He made an ill-advised decision to run back to Washington to help fix it, just like a Senator, while Obama acted like someone who expected Congress to do their part without him. Personally I think it was a gutless ploy, but the voters bought it. The Democrats used the public's attention to attack McCain, and he lost ground that he never made up.
Could more money have made a difference? Maybe. Personally I think a better campaign strategy, better handling of Gov Palin (including more prep work before she was announced), and more time spent on a consistent message about the economy and WHY it was tanking would have meant more than an extra hundred million dollars. I was a big supporter of Senator McCain, but felt very let down by the way he handled himself down the stretch, and after the election. I don't think him not being Conservative was any more of a factor than any of the other dozen major issues with his campaign. In the end, he did not act Presidential (including that abysmal performance on The View, which he should have never attended), and that gave voters on the fence all the excuse they needed to vote for Obama. A better candidate with a concise, logic-driven message can win, whether he's a staunch Conservative or a Moderate one. The thing that can't win is someone who makes voters think there's no particular reason to vote FOR him/her.
In the end, I wish it had been Romney. He was a better speaker, would have been stronger on the economy (by light years), had a lot of his own money he could have spent, and wouldn't have been afraid to challenge Obama on his weaknesses. I still don't know if he would have won, but I think he would have been the best chance. But that doesn't mean I'm going to cower in fear of Obama's money, or run to the Right (and positions I don't actually believe in) to win. Let the best man/woman win next time around, and I'll do my best to support them (as long as we don't disagree on an epic scale).
Once again, nothing more than complaining about Hollywood…yet you do nothing about it. I mean where are the conservative producers and writers originating new ideas and content. You have to make shows regarding conservative ideas yet no one here is doing that. I mean there has to be a list of conservative minded producers…(because I have tons of ideas) hee…heee
Yes, and I must say that Conservatives are about as relevant to the real world today as Native Americans are.
Box office may be up, but the Oscar nominees for Best Picture didn't benefit from that upturn. When was the last time a Best Picture nominee was a runaway success at the box office? In the 90s it stopped being about a good movie, and became more about politics, oppression, and down-on-their-luck characters. Slumdog Millionaire won. I think we've gotten that point already. But look at the other nominees-Frost/Nixon – politics. Milk – politics, oppression of gays. The Reader – politics and oppression. Anything with Nazis is about politics and oppression. I know nothing about the other two movies, but at least 3 of the 5 followed a liberal agenda.
I have a dream, that the movies of my children's generation will not be judged by political ideals they represent, but of the entertainment the viewers feel.
It makes him feel superior. He picked a winner when he voted, so he feels vindicated in telling other people that he's smarter.
As a side note, my cousin had a t-shirt of a smiley face with a finger up its nose. It was captioned: "Pick a winner."
Oh.. ha ha ha ha ha… ha ha ha ha…. oh… hahah rip… snort… chuckle…. hahahah
You are so funny. Now, go back to being a troll… or comment on the article.
Kinda of like saying "worst economy since the depression"? That kind of comment?
I thought it would be the $13.00 a week? I have been in business for close to 30 years, and I think I’m going to shut down, and deliver my 15 employee’s to their Messiah, and get on the government teat. I was hoping for some advice on being, well worthless. I’ve always worked and paid my way so it’ll be new. Around noon, do we meet at a park or something, and think of the many ways that we are impaired. For instance if you’re getting Social Security Disability Benefits and you want a raise, what do you do? Do food stamps come with your Social Security or do I need to go to another govt. agency? Once I move into Sec.8 housing, how do you get a better house? When you show up at the Health Department, and is being white going to be a problem? How much do I sell my vote for during elections? Maybe go back to college and be a lifelong student? I to want to be in love government, and maybe someone could help?
Andrew
Using the first sentence of the third paragraph of the Torn from the Flag review,there are enough credits there to trick all the cinephile liberals into the theater. Guerilla tactics will be required for this fight.
When you show up at the Health Department, and is being white going to be a problem?
I needed to leave the, "and" out, oops I'm in for a correstion.
"Correction, "damn I'm in trouble!
Agreed. I would like to see more parties. Of course the downside is that if you split the vote, it gives radicals like the Left more power (they currently have 20% of the national vote, so are mostly marginalized). I don't think there is any political system that can protect us from the stupid and deluded among us. It will always be a struggle, which probably isn't a bad thing.
Wow. What an ignorant bigot you are.
I agree about Huckabee. If he hadn't have been in, I'm sure Romney would have taken the primaries. I agree with Mitt a lot more than I disagree, so I would have happily supported him. I still don't know if he would have won, but it would have been interesting to see a business man running against Obama during the economic meltdown.
What part of "I'm not a Republican" did you not understand? The only reason it appears I've moved Right is that my old party lurched so far to the Left they are unrecognizable. I have hope for some of the more Conservative Democrats who are now making their way through the system, but the ones who've entrenched themselves in power for life are Liberal, and have moved the party away from where the vast majority of Americans reside. Obama had to campaign on a myth (that he was a Centrist) in order to win. Since I've lived near his district for all of my life, I knew that was a joke, and so never even considered supporting him (and have no doubt he'll fail epically).
You don't suppose Jefferson being an indicted criminal had anything to do with it? Not to mention a change in the makeup of the district? Principles matter, even if you or I don't agree with every one of them. Just having principles is a positive at this point in society. I would, however, like to get to the day where a Republican can get elected without having to cow-tow to every special interest out there. The Religious Right has to remember that they are a portion of the 30% voting block for Conservatives. They have a voice (an important one), but that's not the same thing as having the power to put people in office. We all have to compromise on some things. Personally, I think Rudy would have been much better on guns and abortion than Obama. Don't you?
Why do some of the posts not get on the site?
Yep – although I am a fan of Sarah and I probably would not have looked into her history as deep is she had not been on the ticket. Not sure who Mitt would have picked…..
To simplify – The Republicans have a long history of doing the right thing. More Democrats have brought us to war than Republiccans, spent more on failed Social Policies, kept people in the corner i.e Blacks and women etc.
That's why this website is so interesting – the Liberal Democrats have been able to spin their history and message to the masses with more help by Hollywood and the Media than Republicans have been able to or were allowed to. (big diff between Hollywood of the 40's vs the 60's)
As you stated Bush being on the high road for 8 years did nobody any good with the exception of the DNC to run wild with spin and misinformation.
My only addition to your other posts is that during the Primaries – I believe that Mike Huckabee staying in for the last 5-8 states split many votes between McCain and Romney…..I think it was intentional and also willingly accepted by the McCain camp.
I hated voting for McCain……but atleast I had Sarah to use for motivation. But I voted for him and talked to others about voting for him – I guess you could say I was one of the "Hold you nose conservatives" – but I don't care – a RINO is always better than something like this insane stuf we have now.
And if a film with a similar theme had been made in Israel, it would have gotten zero Oscars. I didn't hear any of the presenters or winners mention the Mumbai massacre. Giving a foreign film like Slumdog Millionaire all those Oscars was a way of taking some of the heat off the lefties for ignoring Gran Torino and basically trashing Dark Knight. Slumdog was a good movie. But it wasn't that good.
Sean has no Pennis.
And if McCain firmly believed he is Napoleon, I wouldn't believe that either.
You've said what needs to be SHOUTED! They will continue because there is no one there to say, "You will NOT pass!" STOP TALKING! No one cares if you make sense. You need to back up words with deeds. Everything else is just a sedative.
You must be logged in to post a comment.