Thankfully, that is certainly not the case here and as expected, the very same leftists who would praise the bravery of anyone trashing Christians, are now screaming “Islamophobia!”:

—–

Gothamist:

While Leary is probably trying to shock his fans out of their pre-holiday stupor—fueled by a never ending stream of wallpaper Christmas tunes—we had a very tough time sitting through this particularly xenophobic one-note joke.

Islamophobia Watch:

A jaw-droppingly Islamophobic video has been posted by Irish-American comedian Denis Leary on WhoSay. Some years ago Leary took a firm stand against Mel Gibson’s antisemitism. But apparently crude anti-Muslim stereotyping is fine with Leary.

Please note that neither one said anything objecting to Leary’s shots at Christianity.

Who’s the “phobe” now?

Screaming “Islamophobia,” “xenophobia,”  “homophobia,” “bullying,” or anything of the like, is just the cowards’ way of telling the satirist to shut up.

Repressive tolerance.

These awful people hide their desire to silence free speech with the not-so-velvet hammer of political correctness.

If Leary was on record only ever trashing Muslims, then these crybabies might have a point. But that’s just not the case, and what you have is a reenactment of what we see every time gays are in any way satirized: humorless, sanctimonious, censorious prigs demanding those groups more equal than others receive inoculation from satire.

Good for Denis Leary and please thank Weasel Zippers for for digging this up.

Really? It was the white vote that got him elected. And if you’re so sure about your statement, then does that mean you (Michael Moore) have a problem with Obama based on his ethnicity?

Is there somethin’ you’re trying to avoid telling us? Looks to me like you’re trying to mitigate your own bigotry by broad-brushing everybody with your disposition. That’s right. You’re projecting, you miserable jackass; which makes sense because you’re a socialist and you expect people to share in a miserable existence.

I’m sick of white liberals like Michael Moore who patronize black people and try to stay in their good graces by falsely accusing white people of racism, and then try to further validate it with some bogus display of self effacement.  This joker is a prime example of how white democrats feel that they’re the ones who are tuned in to the black community. They can speak for us. They know us, and where that notion comes from is due to them thinking that they own us.

And the sadder part is, is that too many black people are suckered by this pandering, and shack there shackles like it’s a damn tambourine, singin’ the praises of Democrats.

Michael Moore goes on to say some junk about Obama getting the youth vote and not the vote of the older folks.

You know? It should speak volumes that Obama got the youth vote, and not the vote of the matured. Hello! The matured have had some time to think through some things, live through some things, learn from some things.

But Michael Moore doesn’t learn, because his backwardness causes him to use his mouth twice as much as his ears. What’s more, Michael Moore hates America. The TSA should be crawlin’ over that wildebeest like fleas.

But no. This America hater isn’t a suspect. Those of us who enjoy this republic are the suspects. Janet Napolitano thinks of us as right wing extremist, and dangerous. Obama has referred to us as the enemy.

Now I can understand a pat down. If you want to get into a club you’re most likely gonna get patted down. You don’t want drama to start up in the club, and you definitely don’t want none on a plane. But a pat down is one thing, and we’re steppin’ into the realm of a frisky frisk. The PATRIOT Act never demanded that I use my webcam to show national security my junk. Ya hear that Michael Moore?

How ‘bout we let the military fully do their job. How about allowing water-boarding if necessary, Ms. Behar? “Why. Don’t you get water-boarded?” she asks. Um, because I’m not involved in a mass murder plot.

If Joy Bahar really disagrees with water-boarding then she wouldn’t even wish it upon people she disagrees with. But the sad part is that she is so quick to recommend it for a person she disagrees with but is offended that it would be done to a person who would saw a man’s head off.

This is the backwards mentality of the Left. Why doesn’t our government show the kind of zeal they’re demonstrating with airport security and do that with border security? The liberal government wants us to learn how to live with terrorism like herpes.

The terrorists are going to find a way. Hell, it can even get to a point where a big group of ‘em book a flight together, and the night before the flight they load up on some beans; cause at this point farts aren’t considered a potential threat, and a tummy full of flatulence ain’t gonna set off any alarms.

So they can get on the plane and just start lettin’ em slip at cruising altitude. The passengers will be trapped aboard a cabin filling up with funky vapors and won’t know where it’s coming from because the terrorists have been well trained to release the farts silently every time. Taking silent but violent to a whole new level, right?

And just when enough farts have been released to trigger the oxygen mask, they’ll activate a discrete detonator and bam:

A Fart-twah at thirty thousand feet.

[Rosie] O’Donnell said she wanted to “build on what Oprah began and excelled at for 25 years, in my own style and with new adaptations and ideas.”

Rosie O’Donnell will return to daytime television with new show.

Rosie O’Donnell has confirmed that she wants to return to daytime television with a new talk show in the fall of 2011. The timing is considered significant because that’s also the time The Oprah Winfrey Show is scheduled to end.

“Wolverines!”

There are some welcome ideological surprises lurking within the script’s 104 pages.  Shockingly, Hollywood actually seems to accept the premise that if the Chinese and Russkies invade the United States we are justified in fighting back with hot lead instead of teach-ins and choruses of Kumbayah.  But the script also displays a bit of the moral illiteracy we’ve come to expect from the Hollywoodoids – naturally, the script has to imply that we kinda brought the invasion on ourselves and that resisting tyranny somehow means becoming just as bad as the tyrants.

The re-imagining of Red Dawn will be released later this year and does very little actual re-imagining of the original’s simple plot.  We first meet some all-American teenagers.  They play high school football, party, and talk and look like CW series cast members – not real bright, but pretty (the pretty part in the script).  For some reason, the Soviets (replaced here by the Chinese with a Russian assist) invade America and seize their hometown.  Their town’s tactical significance appears to be that invading it advances the plot.  Anyway, the teenagers go up into the mountains, score some of the firearms our prescient Founders ensured we’d always have the right to keep and bear despite the best efforts of those gun control-loving wusses, and launch a bloody guerrilla war against the invaders. 

Sure, that sounds awesome in theory, but John Milius’s original Red Dawn was – well, let me be diplomatic – probably one of the silliest movies ever made.  And I loved it.  When you combine killing communists with unbelievable camp – like the teen warriors’ giggle-inducing battle cry of “Wolverines!” and Harry Dean Stanton’s memorable scene that ends with him hollering “Avenge me!” – and then add some beer, you’ve got one hell of an awesome time at the movies.  In the quarter century since its release, it’s inspired a cult following.  A young captain even adapted the title as the name of the Army operation that rounded up the late, unlamented Saddam Hussein.

Now, I’m not here to evaluate the aesthetic worthiness of Carl Ellsworth’s script.  I’ll leave that task to someone with the expertise to properly critique its unique aesthetic qualities – like noted reviewer Hackey von Hackenheimer.  I will say that Ellsworth must have sat through a few of those screenwriting seminars because you can set your watch by the predictable action beats (“Hmmm, we’re three quarters through the script, so time for Act III to begin:  {*types into FinalDraft 8*} ‘MCGUFFIN ENTERS and provides motivation for climactic battle sequence.’”)

Let’s just say you won’t walk out of the theater feeling that your prior conception of what “cinema” is has been radically redefined.

—–

Of course, there’s no Patrick Swayze here.  Boo.  And the new Red Dawn also unforgivably omits the cry of “Avenge me!” in favor of a much lamer substitute.  Those interested in specifics of the plot, such as it is, can peruse this spoiler-filled synopsis.  As John Nolte memorably put it, we’re here to spot the liberal sucker punches for you, not to reveal fanboy-centric plot points like whether Boba Fett’s helmet will be dented on the right side or the left side.

The hero is Jed, probably because Hollywoodoids think everyone who lives east of the I-5 is named “Jed,” or possibly “Zachariah” or “Cletus.”  Jed is a 22-year old Marine who has come home after fighting in Iraq.  I guess the fact that he’s not portrayed as a raving psycho counts as something like progress.  The script’s view of Iraq is ambiguous, as demonstrated by Jed’s exchange with a local hick who incoherently swings between gung ho belligerence and neo-isolationist cliches. 

Returning vets do get into those kinds of conversations, but it’s usually with Blue State quarter-wits sounding off with Mother Jones talking points.  Whatever – we should just be grateful Jed doesn’t launch into a speech about how Bu$hitler lied and his buddies died, or how Dick Cheney, in association with the Carlyle Group, hid WMDs in oil wells to raise Haliburton’s stock price.

There are a couple of nice scenes.  Early on, the escapees get to a cabin and decide to arm themselves with the firearms stored there.  The script does not see this as odd or unusual – it rightly assumes that every American should always ensure his or her ready access to weapons in order to be able to do their duty and defend their society in time of emergency.  However, the cabin’s owner had failed to stockpile a sufficient amount of ammunition, and the script properly points out this major lapse.  All real Americans should always be ready with adequate supplies of arms and ammunition – after all, “Bang” is the sound an American makes while maintaining this country’s freedom. 

Jed trains up his guerrillas and they start killing the Chinese occupiers.  That’s cool.  Some might scoff at the notion that a bunch of armed rural folks could have any effect against a professional army.  I would note the fact that we don’t speak with an English accent and enjoy our beer cold rather than warm and by the pint.  I would also note the example of a Finnish hunter who personally took out at least 705(!) Russian soldiers, and observe that deer are harder to hit than people.  Now, the training scenes are a bit perfunctory (I’d have gone for an 80s-style musical montage myself) and the “Wolverines” go from high school kids to steely-eyed killers pretty quickly – though they sure babble about their feelings a lot.   A lot.

There is also a rudimentary explanation of the theory of insurgency – Ellsworth rightly does not seem to think his kids can win by literally forcing the stronger enemy to flee by inflicting damage, rather than by forcing their departure by setting conditions among the populace that make further occupation too painful to bear.  Guerrillas who get in stand-up firefights with counter-insurgents tend to become dead guerrillas. 

And there’s a refreshing take on the proper response to those foreigners who murder Americans – the script actually agrees that you fight back and kill them.  I wish I could share the exact quote, but just seeing that sentiment on the page of a Hollywood script is a revelation.  Did someone at a Rodeo Drive bistro secretly spike Ellsworth’s Pellegrino with Awesome Coolness Pills, because Hollywood needs more of that kind of clarity and old-fashioned can-do.  I need a cigarette after reading something like that.

It’s not all awesome.  There are a couple of throw-away lines where the Chinese invasion is explained, in part, by the massive liberal-spending binge debt we owe them.  There are lots of reasons to worry about foreign debt; I’m not sure the threat of repossession is one of them.  The explanation for how the wily, inscrutable Asian enemy (and the script does portray them as wily and inscrutable) pulled off the invasion is pretty lame too. 

Also, there’s an unintentionally hilarious scene where the junior varsity guerrillas get a drop on some US commandos, the leader of which introduces himself as a lieutenant in the Delta Force.  Ummm.  Well, that bunch does not take inexperienced lieutenants.  And they don’t tell outsiders they are from “Delta Force.”  And pulling an AK-47 on one of those guys is a good way to get a 7.62mm suppository – if you’re lucky.

There are no real sucker punches, but there is at least a sucker tap.  The script really falls down on the job toward the middle, where Jed momentarily devolves into the kind of dork who spews the type of moral equivalence that might seem profound to a pampered UC Berkeley sophomore but that is, in reality, really stupid. 

He whines that because he’s using guerrilla tactics that he is now just like the jihadi scumbags he fought in Iraq.  His girlfriend Toni inarticulately disagrees.  This is supposed to be a moving moment, but it only served to move my lunch back up my esophagus.

The character of “Toni” should have smacked some sense into Jarhead Jed since the script didn’t have his drill sergeant around to do it.

You know, the audience is watching an uplifting and inspirational tale of shooting communists and all of a sudden this nonsense pops up.  Just stop.  Let’s try another example.  Nazis liked oxygen.  Hey, Americans like oxygen too!  Ergo, Hitler and Americans are the same, right?  Nimrods.  The fact that we kill bad people for killing us does not make us bad too.  For the perpetual sophomores out there, the test of the morality of a conflict is the cause you fight for; the tools you use are largely irrelevant.  American bayonet – good.  Nazi bayonet – bad.  I blame the public schools for this kind of nonsense and muddled reasoning – the “critical thinking” they purport to teach is actually anything but. 

Let’s clarify for those who remain unclear – the act of shooting, blowing up, bludgeoning or otherwise eliminating those who threaten and murder Americans is an unambiguously good thing. What al Qaeda terrorists, Taliban, Shiite militias, Republican Guards, Viet Cong, North Koreans, Nazis, Imperial Japanese soldiers and their ilk feel or felt deeply in their little hearts and warped minds about their various causes is irrelevant and unworthy of attention — except to the extent that understanding their thought processes facilitates defeating them.  Their destruction was and is a moral necessity and unquestionably morally right; their fighting Americans was and is unquestionably morally wrong.  Always.  End of story. 

Any questions?  No?  Good. 

However, the script is admirably forthright on how best to deal with American traitors and collaborators.  Let’s just say due process comes quickly and in pistol form.  That’s refreshing.  As a lawyer, I appreciate trials and such, but as someone who has known folks killed and wounded by such bastards, my perspective is different.

It’s nice to see that in Red Dawn, Hollywood is at least inching toward ideological sanity.  The Americans are the good guys.  The people trying to kill the Americans are the bad guys.  In this way, if in no other, the new Red Dawn is just like real life.

But now he’s coming out with a new film, called Four Lions, a comedy about suicide bombers.

Check out the trailer, here.

Now, I haven’t seen the flick, but I did read a rare interview with Morris in the London Times about the comedy, and a few things bugged me.

As far as I can tell, his movie is based on the premise that nearly all terrorists are buffoons – and from there he makes an attempt to “humanize” these “Keystone Kops.” He’s probably right that most terrorists are useless tools – but he overlooks the fact that buffoons need only succeed once to kill dozens, hundreds, or thousands.

It comes down to this: Is a homicidal mentally challenged person any less dangerous than one with a Ph.D.?

I suppose it depends where you’re standing when the blast goes off.

Odder still, Morris seems concerned less with offending victims of terror, than Islamic extremists. In the interview, he makes it clear that there’s no intent to “mock” Islam. But this worry directly undermines his whole premise. If these bozo bombers are so incompetent, why would you worry about offense? I’m thinking that Theo Van Gogh, the Dutch director murdered by an offended Islamic extremist, must lurk in Morris’s brain.

But Morris has to remember: Van Gogh took actual risks. He condemned extremism. I haven’t seen Four Lions, but judging from the interview, it doesn’t sound like Morris did the same.

So he’s safe. Which is the last thing I’d think Chris Morris would want to be.

And if you disagree with me, you’re probably a racist homophobe who eats unicorns.

Also, if you get a chance, track down the legendary Brass Eye episode devoted to Pedophilia. It’s probably Chris Morris’s best work. I think the entire special is up on youtube, in three sections.

Tonight we’ve got the Scorpions, Jim Norton, S.E. Cupp, and Carrie Keagan!

Once upon a time Hollywood had no problem distinguishing our enemies from our allies. Now our allies are often shown to be feckless and evil while our enemies are either ignored or made out to be mere puppets of our evil leaders.

For example, last season of “24″ had an African dictator’s troops invading the country and trying to unleash a deadly virus, but of course, they were working for an evil Blackwater type military contractor run by a right-wing “patriot.” Patriot is Hollywoodese for crazy nut job. The same kind of villains were used in this year’s “State of Play” which had evil government contractors murdering people to cover up their evil conspiracy. Or last year’s “Body of Lies,” also starring Russell Crowe, which showed the CIA as a bunch of lying killers who have Arabs picked off with abandon for the aims of US policy. And let’s not forget 2007’s “Valley of Elah” in which American soldiers are portrayed as soulless killers made that way because they were exposed to combat. Or how about “Syriana”, in which a fat George Clooney wanders around the Arabian desert learning how evil the US is while boring the audience with an obscure plot.

And now we have the upcoming “Green Zone” with Maaaatt Daaaamonnnn. The villains appear to be evil American contractors again. Sheesh, are they done with Nazis now as the cliched Hollywood villain? Oh, I forgot, they’re busy making Nazis more sympathetic now.

Hollywood seems to have it in their head that Americans are the bad guys.

Meanwhile, Muslim fanatics of the Al Qaeda variety don’t exist in Hollywood movies anymore. You have to go back to 1994’s “True Lies.” Yet James Cameron’s movie didn’t exactly take the threat of Muslim terrorists seriously. It treated them more like typical goofy movie villains for the hero to punch out. And now, when Islamo-fascists are referenced at all, they are usually shown to be tools of evil Americans (with the exception of a handful of art films, mostly foreign, like 2007’s the “Kite Runner” in which the Taliban were shown to be the murderous thugs they are.)

Hollywood once had no trouble showing us the villains of the world. The Nazis were an easy target. After all, they were vanquished. Yet they took on the Soviets on occasion. They also had no problem coming up with all kinds of diverse antagonists of every nationality. Not anymore. Now they can’t even deal with the most clear cut bad guys around, the Islamo-Fascists.

Not Muslims, Islamo-Fascists. There’s a difference.

The fact is, terrorist groups like Al Qaeda are not loved in the Muslim world despite what some would tell you. They’ve killed more innocent Muslims than any combatants in recent wars. The Taliban are oppressors in Afghanistan and Pakistan. The US, on the other hand, has done a lot to build schools, hospitals and infrastructure both in Afghanistan and Iraq. But Hollywood makes our contractors as sinister villains. Both TV and film are knocking out one hack script after another. And our troops are often shown badly as well, despite the fact that we have the most disciplined armed forces in the world.

Once upon a time Hollywood used to make films for the war effort showing the free people of the world what we’re fighting for and why. Now they make movies that do the opposite. They question our motives and make us out to be the villains.

So whose side are you on, Hollywood? If your goal is to make money, you keep failing. The movies I listed above, that made us the villains, were all failures. Movies that make us heroes tend to be successful. Are you using Obama math now?

To paraphrase your favorite president, George W. Bush, either you’re with us or you’re against us. We’re not feeling the love right now.

In case you don’t get it, Islamo-fascists shut down all media when they get into power. They kill gays, lefties, intellectuals first. Are you telling us you approve? Because there’s no point in attacking your own side otherwise. Not unless you want us to lose.

Oh, I know, you don’t think these terrorists are any real threat. That’s why all those lefty “comedians” aren’t afraid to mock Islam and terrorists, right? Oh, yeah… they don’t do that. They mock Christians instead. Because they know Christians won’t kill them.

If you’re afraid of fatwas, Salman Rushdie is still picking up hot women and hanging around parties. All those Danish cartoonists threatened with death are still around years later.

So in other words, are you a bunch of spineless cowards? A pack of gutless, cringing eunuchs? Are you are letting the world know this by attacking your own side, hoping the bad guys will treat you better if they win? Like those Jews who worked for the Nazis in Poland as ghetto cops, thinking they would be spared the cattle car treatment?

I think you better get your priorities straight. Pronto.

Now, I’m no fan of hate. Hate in all forms is ugly, even when performed by beautiful people (that’s a shout out to Stephanie Von Pratt, who turned me down for my senior prom). But here’s what I don’t get: If I kill someone, I’m a killer. But hate crime law says that I also broke a new law, one that has to do with my thoughts when I committed said crime.

So it’s a thought crime more than a hate crime. Which begs the question: How can a thought be against the law?

Now I can barely read, so I don’t want to get too deep into this, but if I were to kill my co-host Bill Schulz, whether I hated him or not, that’s a crime. But, if we find out later that he was a sequential hermaphrodite, one might say it could be a hate crime.

I don’t get that at all.

What of terrorists? Does the fact that they hate us make their crimes worse? Not to them; punishment is meaningless. Which is the real truth about hate, anyway: Hate crime laws won’t stop hate or crime. It’s an after-the-fact gesture that does nothing to stop evil.

Even more, focusing on the killer’s outlook diminishes the victim. It’s no longer Bill Schulz is dead, but “Bill Schulz, the sequential hermaphrodite, is dead.”

Humanity should come before identity. We need to see people as people, not as part of groups. We know bigotry is bad. But murder in any form is so substantially worse, that it needs no footnote.

And if you disagree with me, then you’re probably racist.

Tonight we’ve got a humdinger of a show!

-Courtney Friel (in costume)

-S.E. Cupp (not sure)

-Ron Geraci

-Dr. Michael Baden (a special Halloween edition)

-my mom!

This one’s for the writers and artists who tell the truth about the enemy, using the enemy’s own words and actions against them.  As for my own work, find out why it led a troll to actually post this at my blog:  “People like you are the reason why I won’t be sad when we all die in a nuclear holocaust.”

The other night, Bill O’Reilly was explaining that this award meant the world would view America as a peace-loving nation.  Brent Budowsky, lectured the “talk America down” Republicans for attacking the announcement, saying ”this is good for America.”  TIm Kaine claimed that the prize was “an affirmation of the fact that the United States has returned to its longstanding role as a world leader.”  America is popular again; may we all celebrate with great enthusiasm.  If only there wasn’t that nagging question of what price President Obama has paid in order usher in this era of good will.   

In January, most conservatives cheered Barack Obama’s actions in Afghanistan and Iraq, where he mostly kept President Bush’s policies intact.  Unfortunately, this agreement on foreign affairs quickly dissolved, as Obama began his series of apology tours through South America, Egypt and Europe.  His administration ignored the corrupt Iranian elections, and gave little to no support to the democracy advocates being killed as they protested in the streets of Tehran.  Weeks later, his administration attempted to bully Honduras into reinstating a corrupt president who had attempted his own coup of the country’s democratic government.  Then our President left our Eastern European allies in the lurch when he abandoned the missile defense system there as a conciliatory move towards the Russians (for which he received nothing in return).  And now we are seeing what may become the beginning of an about face on Afghanistan, as President Obama changes his tune on the Taliban. 

It would seem as though the Nobel committee is only congratulating our President for emasculating America’s role as a leader and advocate for democracy. As usual, America’s popularity rises only when we abandon the position of strength which has secured both ourselves and our allies over the past eight years.  Rush Limbaugh said it best with these words: “[The world] love[s] a weakened, neutered US, and this is their way of promoting that concept.” 

Of course, by taking this stance, Rush and the rest of us have “thrown in [our] lot with the terrorists” according to the DNC.  Democrats would rather we blindly cheer as our President wins a popularity contest, while our enemies gather and strengthen their own positions.  This last week, America’s status as an economic world leader weakened further as rumors surfaced that the Gulf states were considering abandoning the dollar. At the same time, our President risks emboldening terrorists around the world as he toys with the idea of giving the Taliban any sort of victory in Afghanistan.  

So, I’m afraid this moment of triumph for America is anything but.  While some may be tempted to smile and wave as our President accepts this award as some sort of victory for our national pride I can’t help but picture a beaming Carrie being crowned the prom queen as a bucket of pig’s blood hovers dangerously above.

In a world where men fly planes into towers and are celebrated as heroes by the vile culture that breeds them, we need a new kind of hero that symbolizes our battle against such evil. An icon against jihad who does the right thing no matter how bad it looks, and who brings an unprecedented ruthlessness to a ruthless enemy. A hero who is a great villain to all those who had a good day on 9/11/01.

Ready or not, here comes Pigman.