Vaughn, being the pro he is, finished undeterred, going on to describe his long standing relationship with Rep. Paul. Looking at the crop of actors and artists who have thrown out their support for Paul in recent months, one has to wonder if Vaughn started all this and whether he was a “brave actor” when he dared to stand for something opposing the liberal Occupy Wall Street mentality of Hollywood celebrities.

The “Swingers” star stood for capitalism and his own conservatism in front of that audience, and it seems to have sparked a sudden movement in Hollywood of celebrities supporting the capitalism loving, libertarian leaning Paul. But, does this mean a change in Hollywood from the liberal, Obama worshipping place we know it as?

Heck, if Oliver Stone can publicly state he’d vote for Paul over President Barack Obama, then Hollywood is truly in uncharted political waters.

To be fair, Ron Paul is no George W. Bush. Hell, he’s no Ronald Reagan, either. Paul is admittedly more of a libertarian than a religious-based conservative, but he always has been. He’s been the man preaching sound economics and praising Ayn Rand principles since before the ’80s. And now, after a financial crisis, we have a new generation of conservatives who care for individual liberties above all else, and it seems a few of them are Hollywood celebrities. We even recently got a film adaptation of Ayn Rand’s “Atlas Shrugged.”

Paul may not be as modernly Republican as, say, Rick Santorum, but it means something to see actors/artists support a man who preaches doing away with income tax completely and that the self-interest principles taught by philosophers like Rand can lead to peace and prosperity for all as opposed to the nanny states proposed by sitting president Obama. Seeing celebrities stand for this shows them going against the socialist-loving Hollywood they inhabit. It may not mean a complete change, but think about the people that have come out for Paul who we never would’ve guessed would’ve held individualistic or conservative principles.

The biggest endorsement, besides Vaughn, was probably from Kelly Clarkson, winner of the first season of “American Idol.” She announced her support of the congressman through Twitter. Not long after, she was attacked almost endlessly by people claiming Paul was ridiculous things like racist. Singer-songwriter Michelle Branch also tweeted her support of Paul to Clarkson. The “Idol” veteran stood her ground and was rewarded the next day when her “Stronger” album sales jumped a supposed 600 percent after Paul supporters rewarded her statement with their record-buying dollars.

Paul also appeared on “The Tonight Show with Jay Leno” where comedian and “Fear Factor” host Joe Rogan came out with a Ron Paul 2012 T-shirt and began praising the congressman and his views on everything from economics to civil liberties. Paul also garnered endorsements from former Catwoman Julie Newmar, who claimed before Paul that she never would have voted for a Republican let alone someone from Texas. Similar comments were shared by Juliette Lewis from TV’s “The Firm,” who made clear that she wasn’t a Democrat or a Republican before endorsing Rep. Paul.

Paul’s supporters have also apparently been trying to drum up a bit of celebrity support for the congressman without the celebrities’ consent. Nicole Sherzinger’s, Rise Against’s and No Doubt’s Twitter accounts were all allegedly hacked tweeting support for the congressman. All have since denied such endorsements and set the record straight.

Stone’s Paul shoutout marks the most surprising Hollywood connection.

I think in many ways the most interesting candidate – I’d even vote for him if he was running against Obama – is Ron Paul.  Because he’s the only one of anybody who’s saying anything intelligent about the future of the world.

It appears the man is able to garner support from everyone from Vaughn who claim to be conservative to those like Stone who make propaganda films supporting dictators like Hugo Chavez and Fidel Castro. Ironically, a world where Paul was president would be the exact opposite of these dictatorships considering his enduring belief in the individual, rather than the state/government.

What does any of this mean for Hollywood? Not much, really. Hollywood is still quite a partisan place where people are ostracized for making blockbusters about Jesus Christ.

The Paul movement does show some celebrities are willing to come out and stand for the fact that they make money and don’t need the government telling them what to do when it comes to helping their fellow man. Such statements can be considered radical when put in the context of a Hollywood that is filled with people praising murderers like Hugo Chavez while making demeaning and evil comments about former governor of Alaska, Sarah Palin.

Paul may be more of a libertarian than anything, but so are many Tea Partiers of today and, apparently, some of them live in the Hollywood community, whether they identify themselves as conservative, liberal, etc. It used to be bad to come out and say you were for making money and ambition and individualism and against government control when you worked in Hollywood. I’m sure it still is, but clearly some artists and actors have the will power to stand up for their individualistic and libertarian principles, and the key factor behind that may be Paul.

Instead of shooting actual lizards or resorting to stop-motion magic, director Steven Spielberg’s team used CGI to render the most dynamic dinosaurs ever captured on film.

—–

Those stunning creations are the main pleasure to be mined from ‘The Lost World: Jurassic Park,’ the 1997 sequel to Spielberg’s monster mash. The film just hit Blu-ray as part of a ‘Jurassic’ trilogy, a hefty collection including all three films (so far) as well as a copious array of extras and 7.1 surround sound.

What’s even more obvious seeing the film anew in High-Def is how little Spielberg brought to the project. It ranks as one of the weaker films in his otherwise exemplary canon, a pedestrian affair not worth the master’s attention.

‘The Lost World’ breaks the land speed record for setting a sequel plot in motion. The film opens with cagey chaos theorist Dr. Ian Malcolm (the droll Jeff Goldblum) learning the dinosaurs who almost ate him for lunch last time aren’t as extinct as he hoped. Dino researcher John Hammond (Richard Attenborough) also deposited some dinosaur DNA on a second, formerly unknown location. No fences. No theme park attractions. Just an undisturbed locale where the creatures could live – and be studied – in a natural setting.

John assembles a small research team to do just that, including Ian’s paleontologist squeeze (Julianne Moore). That forces Ian to swoop in with the hope of getting her out of their before she ends up as T-Rex food.

The team, including a brave photographer (Vince Vaughn) and tools guru (Richard Schiff), initially rebuff Ian’s warnings about their expedition.

“Ooh, ahh … that’s how it all starts. And then there’s running and screaming,” Ian says in that Goldblum speak which makes any line reading better. But John’s greedy nephew (Arliss Howard) has other plans in mind for the dinosaurs. He wants to bring a few back to the states to populate a new exhibit at the San Diego Zoo and make a mint in the process. Darn those greedy capitalists!

A more committed Spielberg should have barked, “re-write this … and this … and this” long before cranking up his camera. Giving Ian a daughter smacks of demographic desperation, and it doesn’t help that she’s so transparently plugged into the narrative. But so much here runs afoul of common sense that you’re forced to shake your head while waiting for the next cool dinosaur dust up.

For instance, why would the researchers let several dinosaurs loose to thwart the nephew’s team? Don’t they know people could get killed? It’s just one example of a script which doesn’t waste a droplet of sweat on the details that matter.

The best sequence arrives mid-film, as our heroes are trapped in a vehicle dangling off a cliff. It’s the kind of jaw-clenching excitement we got in spades from the first ‘Park,’ and nothing else in this ‘World’ can compare.

The ‘Jurassic Park Ultimate Trilogy’ set includes a six-part ‘Return to Jurassic Park’ documentary series with new interviews, a feature on special effects wizard Phil Tippett and a discussion with the author whose work inspired the franchise, Michael Crichton.

—–

The man at the center of the story is Ronny Valentine (Vince Vaughn), a solid salesman who is business partners with his best friend Nick (Kevin James). Ronny and Nick are trying to develop a new type of car that would combine the sexiness of classic cars with the environmental friendliness of newer models. They are searching for a major car company that is willing to invest in their work.

Ronny is also thinking about proposing to his long-term girlfriend, Beth (Jennifer Connelly) and Nick’s wife Geneva (Winona Ryder) enthusiastically supports the idea. It’s surprising that Geneva is so pro-marriage considering that she’s having an affair, a discovery that Ronny accidentally makes while planning his proposal.

After seeing Geneva with a rugged guy named Zip (Channing Tatum), Ronny must decide whether or not he should tell Nick about the affair. Aside from crushing his best friend’s heart, Ronny knows that revealing the truth would distract Nick from his research in developing the new car model that they are trying to sell. Throughout the story, Ronny tries to figure out what he should do about the “dilemma” he faces.

Unfortunately, Ronny spends most of the story digging himself into a bigger and bigger hole. Instead of making good choices early on, he makes stupid decisions and the story drags out the “dilemma” as much as it can. With very few twists and turns, the story meanders along leading to its inevitable conclusion. 

Many of the choices that Ronny makes throughout the story aren’t easy to understand. Ronny is given numerous opportunities to be honest with his friends  but he always opts against it. He isn’t even comfortable confiding in his girlfriend Beth. Even when she becomes suspicious, he keeps lying for no apparent reason. His remaining silent seems to have less to do with his character and more to do with the writers wanting to up the tension in Ronny’s life.

As Ronny, Vaughn does a solid job and is responsible for the few strong laughs that the movie offers. Unfortunately, the supporting cast isn’t given a lot to do. Queen Latifah, as an executive working with Ronny and Nick, is particularly wasted in a silly role. Even Kevin James, who did great comedic work on “The King of Queens,” doesn’t have the chance to show off his comic abilities in this story.  

Admittedly, “The Dilemma” has an interesting premise and a funny performance from Vaughn. However, the story wastes a lot of the talented actors involved and it drags out with very few surprises. “The Dilemma” might be worth a rental when it comes out on DVD but it’s surely not worth the price of a theater ticket.

Those juicy ethical questions form the center of the new Ron Howard movie “The Dilemma,” a truly offbeat and intelligently adult comedy that stars Vince Vaughn, Kevin James, Winona Ryder, and Jennifer Connelly in a quartet of performances that rise far above the norm of most mainstream comedies. It marks a refreshing return by Howard back to the fun and human comedies he specialized in back in the ‘80s with “Splash” and “Gung Ho,” and away from the blockbuster and Oscar-baiting fare he’s been delivering in the decades since.

—–

“The Dilemma” appears to get off to a rocky start, as the storyline at first focuses on the efforts of longtime buddies Ronny (Vaughn) and Nick (James) to develop an electric car that macho guys won’t be ashamed to drive. Ronny is the smooth-talking fundraiser of the duo, while Nick is the engineering genius who can help them make a $400,000 deal a reality. Some of the negotiations and stress attendant to the business deal are funny, but they’re just not as compelling as what unfolds when the story gets to their personal lives.

Things improve greatly when the story shifts focus to Ronny’s attempt to set up an incredibly romantic proposal for his girlfriend Beth (Connelly). He is hoping to follow in the footsteps of Nick and his wife Geneva (Ryder), whom he calls his “hero couple,” but then he catches Geneva cheating with a hunky young thug (played by Channing Tatum in one of the greatest scene-stealing supporting roles since Brad Pitt rode away with “Thelma and Louise”).

So the titular dilemma unfolds in a string of events that begin to spin wildly out of control as Ronny spies on both Geneva and Nick, and winds up getting in so much trouble that everyone around him starts to believe he’s fallen back into his old gambling addiction again. How Ronny and the rest of the gang spin their way back out again makes for a richly rewarding and funny film that has a surprising bite to it and offers each lead actor a chance to shine.

Credit for this goes all around, but has to start at square one with writer Alan Loeb, who is currently Hollywood’s hottest screenwriter after making an amazing career turnaround in which he sold a dozen scripts at age 39 after nearly two decades of failure. Adding to his inventive work in the Jennifer Aniston-Jason Bateman comedy “The Switch” and his vibrant take on the world of corrupt finance in “Wall Street: Money Never Sleeps,” Loeb shows once again that he knows how to offer up thought-provoking situations in entertaining fashion.

Howard brings a jazzed-up energy to the proceedings, while also creating a mood of awkward tension in many spots that suits the story well and gives much of the film an indie feel. Vaughn gets to deliver two of his funniest rants in years in his best role since “Wedding Crashers,” and also brings the funny in an absolutely insane comedic fight scene with Tatum.

One of Hollywood’s open Republicans, Vaughn brings some interesting touches to the film on a more subtle level. He sports a “Don’t Tread on Me” T-shirt prominently in an early scene, delivers a funny riff on how “gay” electric cars are in a move that slaps PC-ness as well as environmentalism. It’s also undeniably pro-capitalist and entrepreneurial, as the guys show a zest for creativity and making money is seen as a worthy reward for innovation. And Vince even has a heartfelt prayer scene to go with the film’s realistic and overall positive portrayal of marriage and its challenges.

Filling a gaping vacuum in the marketplace for an intelligent comedy couples can enjoy together, “The Dilemma” offers a bracingly funny start to the new year. Here’s hoping Hollywood can keep it up.

“Ladies and gentlemen, electric cars are gay. I mean, not ‘homosexual’ gay, but, you know, ‘my parents are chaperoning the dance’ gay.”

Even though Universal Studios withdrew the trailer after protests, Howard says he will keep the line in the film. Now more protests are threatened unless the joke is cut entirely from the actual movie. This line has sent gay activists into a tizzy and has now made any reference to “gay” in a humorous way, the moral equivalent of carrying Mein Kampf into a synagogue.

One gay activist is quoted as saying the joke promotes “hate and homophobia.” Ellen DeGeneres says it is a form of bullying. Anderson Cooper of CNN agrees, ”We’ve got to do something to make those words unacceptable ’cause those words are hurting kids!” Good for you, Andy. And I’m sure you’ll be apologizing to all the Tea Party activists you called “tea baggers” (indirectly mocking them as“gay”), now that you have seen the light.

I’m sure the people at GLAAD would have come down on Mr. Cooper had they realized what he had said, but they were probably just really busy that year and missed the “joke” that was all over TV and the Internet. Thankfully the folks from GLAAD have finally spoken up and are now trying to end “gay” jokes. I say “bravo,” it’s about time to end all of this “attack” humor.  

We must take a stand and stop letting comedy and comedians offend people.

I know! Let’s get a whole list of banned words and topics together! For the children…

Let’s see, we have the granddaddy of all banned words, a word so bad we can’t even print it, we can only refer to it as the N-word. Then we have the F-word, and I have to be honest and admit that I don’t know if that’s “fag” or “fuck.” We also have another contender for the F-word, “fat.” As someone who has struggled with a weight problems, I find fat jokes offensive. In fact I find those “phat” references offensive too. Would “fag” be any less offensive to leftists if it were spelled “phag?” So let’s knock off the fat jokes. I’m sure thin people find jokes about being skinny hurtful as well, so they are now o-u-t out. Short, tall, unattractive, blond and any other reference to any appearance or feature must be banned, as well.

Then we have the “r” word. We wouldn’t want an actor calling an electric car “retarded” now, would we? Jokes about people with or any reference to any type of limited abilities are now forbidden. We also need to be sensitive to how smart people are portrayed — so jokes about geeks, nerds and dweebs are banned. As a Southerner and hillbilly let’s put an end to all of those hurtful references to how stupid people are in the South. No more NASCAR or incest jokes. Then too, we will have to agree to stop making jokes about New Yorkers and folks from Jersey. No jokes about California or its “dude” culture. In fact, let’s just stop jokes about where people are from and how they behave.

I think it goes without saying that any ethnic reference is gone, Outlawed too is making fun of people’s religion, politics or educational background. No reference will be made to a person’s economic status. This can be hurtful no matter how much or how little a person makes. Did I miss anything? Age? No “Geezer” jokes. Relationships? Off limits.

No jokes about anything.   

I once did a TV show and had a joke about Daylight Savings Time and how in Indiana they don’t observe it. “Indiana days are boring enough without being any longer,” was the punchline. The producer asked me to cut it because it might offend someone in Indiana.  I told him that every joke offends somebody and if he could tell me a joke that didn’t I would cut the line without complaint. I got to do the joke.

As a comedian I know two things for sure; there’s no such thing as a victimless joke and everything offends somebody. That is the whole point of comedy. Comedy is supposed to make fun of something. Great comedy makes us uneasy and makes us question our assumptions. Paraphrasing Twain: We are supposed to make hamburgers out of someone’s sacred cow.

Once we start saying you can make fun of everything except … (insert your favorite set-aside here) it isn’t only the end of comedy…

It’s the end of free speech.

Patrick Goldstein of the L.A. Times proclaims, Ignorance should be a punch line. Identity should not:

 Ignorance should be a punch line. Identity should not. Humor can be a tricky thing to analyze and can be easily (and lazily) defended against criticism by saying “it’s just a joke.” Vaughn himself, when defending this line in his film, said “Comedy and joking about our differences breaks tension and brings us together.” And while Vaughn is wrong about the joke in his movie accomplishing this end, “The Office” is a perfect example of humor getting it right.

“The Dilemma” is hardly the first movie to use the word “gay” in this way, but it has come along at a watershed moment in our culture. Hearing one’s very identity regularly used as a synonym for “inadequate” or “undesirable” on a daily basis does more than just hurt feelings. Recent events have made it abundantly and tragically clear the effect that anti-gay language and attitudes can have on young people who are gay or are perceived to be gay AND on the bullies who target them.

Would it change hearts and minds if Howard had made the decision to pull this line from the film? Would bullies suddenly realize the harm their behavior was causing and stop tormenting their victims? Would spontaneous hugging break out in the hallways of America’s schools? Of course not. But it would create a tiny space in our culture -– a window in which people could draw their own conclusions about what it means to be gay, without being told it’s something negative.

Both Goldstein and Howard asked if “comedy will be neutered” if Vince Vaughn’s character didn’t use the word “gay” to mean something to be made fun of. The answer is no. Acceptance of ridiculing gay people under the guise of “humor” would be neutered. And honestly, comedy might be better off if writers found more creative ways to make us laugh. Maybe a pie in the face?

Will we see a similar defense from Patrick Goldstein of Tea Partiers, conservatives, Christians, right-wingers, and Sarah Palin when pop culture rips their identities?

Rhetorical question… Rhetorical question…

Vince Vaughn on the ‘gay’ trailer non-controversy that so outraged Anderson Cooper and GLAAD:

“Let me add my voice of support to the people outraged by the bullying and persecution of people for their differences, whatever those differences may be. Comedy and joking about our differences breaks tension and brings us together. Drawing dividing lines over what we can and cannot joke about does exactly that; it divides us. Most importantly, where does it stop.”

—–

Adam Lambert on the disgraceful situation in Malaysia that Anderson Cooper and GLAAD didn’t cause a similar uproar over:

Lambert said at a news conference ahead of the concert that the only thing he would omit from his show in the mainly Muslim Southeast Asian country was an onstage kiss with a fellow male performer.

“My performance will still have a lot of vibes about it,” said Lambert, in a black jacket and pants and sporting his trademark black eyeliner.

“That’s not something I can really control. I’m just refraining from making one little kiss,” the former “American Idol” runner-up said when asked whether he was sending the wrong message by agreeing to suppress his sexuality in his show.

“There will be lots of leather and some sequins, and spikes and studs and fur, it’ll be exciting,” said Lambert.

Homosexual sex is a criminal offense in Malaysia, and the main Islamist opposition party in the country has described the show as promoting “gay culture.” Party members have pledged to proselytize concert goers.

Lambert’s glam-rock flamboyance might not represent your particular scene, but give him credit for standing up for who he is and openly defying these murdering, sexist, racist, homophobic theocrats.

Don’t be surprised if Cooper and GLAAD criticize Lambert for his lack of multi-cultural sensitivity. We wouldn’t want to offend murdering, sexist, racist, homophobic theocrats now, would we?

The full-fledged ire of GLAAD, straight from the top of the organization, is laughable.  President Jarrett Barrios says, “There has been a rash of bullying, some leading to suicides, much of it because of the widespread belief that it’s somehow OK to say things about gay people that it is not OK to say about other groups. Comments like those in the movie make it seem OK to beat up gay people.”  So, electric cars are gay = it’s okay to commit violence against gay people.  Check.

Make no mistake:  it is an awful tragedy that Tyler Clementi killed himself because of the malicious, despicable humiliation he was subjected to.  To equivocate that with a goofy putdown of electric cars (and GLAAD does not know the context of this line; sounds like something to establish early on in Vaughn’s character arc that he’s insensitive) is not only moronic but as hypocritical as Fred Phelps asking for some peace and quiet at a funeral.  Why, you may say? One word:  teabaggers.

This week, Anderson Cooper shilled for GLAAD (they do those yearly TV browbeating reports, so I guess he’s hoping to get off lightly) and brought out his crocodile tears about how this one word in the movie trailer was offensive.  He and GLAAD must have forgotten how he helped bring an anti-homosexual pejorative into the mainstream of political discourse.  Between the daily crude assaults that Hollywood celebrities spit at everyday Americans petitioning their government and the all-but-violent anti-gay epithets hurled continuously at Matt Drudge and Andrew Breitbart, GLAAD has not uttered a peep.  Why?  They couldn’t give a flaming pile of crap about consistency, because that would mean betraying the principle of Absolute Power that’s defined the Left since… well, always.

This isn’t a fight for justice or equality.  A fight requires two active participants.  A mugging is more like it, or a demented kid kicking stray dogs on the street.  The last thing Ron Howard is going to do is respond to Jarrett Barrios and call him an idiotic coward.  He and Universal, who are bankrolling the film, are going to tuck their tails and do exactly as they’re told.  Barrios knows this, and he’s laughing all the way to the hit counter on his website.

Priorities.

Speaking of which, take a look over yonder to said website, and check out all the important things GLAAD is doing for the gay community.  Do you see any mention of Adam Lambert?  No?  That’s weird, because his free speech is being curtailed to appease Islamic protesters in Malaysia, a country where homosexual sex can land you in prison for 20 years.  You’d think that a statement like “Lambert is morally unfit. His gay lifestyle will harm our society. He is of bad, bad character and poses a danger to young Malaysians” from Nasrudin Hassan, a representatives of Malaysia’s Islamic Party, would merit more attention than “Electric cars are gay,” wouldn’t you?  But you just believe that because you have a spine, and you’re able to tell the difference between an annoyance and danger, between oppression and irreverence, you heteronormative hatemonger, you.

It’s no surprise that GLAAD’s still wearing politically correct blinders to guide their selective outrage.  In fact, it’s become so commonplace, it’s even easy to ignore, but we’re not gonna do that anymore.  The Left relies on it.  It’s time to hold this frivolous organization’s feet to the fire.  So allow me to announce:  Big Hollywood’s very own To-Do List for the Gay & Lesbian Alliance Against Defamation!

1. Speak out against censorship, accusations of moral degeneracy directed toward gay American pop star performing in Malaysia.

2. Pressure Iranian publications to profile gay couples in country to combat false statements from President, just like recent pressure for Essence.com to profile a lesbian married couple.

3. Upbraid Anderson Cooper, Rachel Maddow, David Shuster, Keith Olbermann, Janeane Garofalo, Roger Ebert, D.C. Douglas, Bill Maher, Carrie Fisher, Brad Friedman, Chuck Schumer, Dick Durbin, Maxine Waters, John Kerry, The American Federation of Government Employees, National Public Radio, and President Obama for using “teabagger” as slur.

4. Investigate and publish names of individuals attempting to silence Andrew Breitbart by calling him gay while protesting at Right Nation 2010.

5. Make Marc Maron persona non grata for hateful bullying of recently outed Ken Mehlman.

And we’re just getting started here.  Commenters?

Thus, although Malaysian authorities have given Lambert the green light for his coming performance, “Malaysia’s Islamist opposition party…[has] demanded that” it be canceled. And where is the outcry over this? In particular, where is the Gay & Lesbian Alliance Against Defamation (GLAAD) when it appears homosexuals traveling to Malaysia need them most?

They are silent, and because of this they appear to be cowering to a group of anti-gay protestors who live in a country that many Americans couldn’t even find on a map.

And while GLAAD turns a blind eye to criticisms of Lambert that would certainly be labeled “homophobic” if they emanated from a Baptist Church in Alabama or a Presbyterian Church in Arkansas, they are giddy as school kids on the Friday before Spring Break when it comes to attacking Vince Vaughn for saying “electric cars are gay” in the upcoming Universal film, “The Dilemma.”

That’s right: Although Lambert could face two decades of prison in Malaysia if, while there, he lives out the freedoms he enjoys in the U.S.A., GLAAD has their panties in an uproar over the fact that a beloved American comic said something they find distasteful.

Has anyone at GLAAD ever thought of granting others the same degree of free speech and linguistic leeway they themselves expect when members of the gay community write in support of groups like “NAMBLA” or demand to be accepted in matrimony the way heterosexual couples are? Of course they haven’t. Instead, they plan to picket and protest Universal’s “The Dilemma” until any mention of electric cars being “gay” is washed from the slate. (GLAAD’s president, Jarrett Barrios, has actually described Vaughn’s words as “hate speech.”)

So there you have it: In Malaysia, they tell Lambert how to dress when he comes to their country and they put homosexuals in prison for decades at a time, but GLAAD has nothing to say about it. Yet here in the U.S.A., where Lambert is free to be what he wants to be, GLAAD is going apoplectic because a character in a movie uses the word “gay” to describe the fact that electric cars look queer.

Maybe GLAAD hasn’t seen the Chevy Volt.

—–

During the footage before and after the jump, Vaughn didn’t talk about his politics, didn’t offer a clue as to who he is or isn’t voting for this November, and gave no indication as to his opinion of government bailouts. Rather, he made sure he praised the soldiers who fight to keep this nation free.  And talking about putting your money where your mouth is: Vaughn not only spoke highly of the troops, he actually did a tandem jump with an Army Specialist which entailed nothing less than putting his life in that soldier’s hands.

Just before Vaughn boarded the plane that would take him to his jump, he was asked for his thoughts and calmly said “I feel like we’re in great hands.” Thereafter, the plane took off, Vaughn did his tandem jump, and after he had parachuted to the ground a reporter approached him and said: “You just jumped out of an airplane with the United States Army parachute team The Golden Knights.” Vaughn looked at the reporter and said:  “And it was the best. It was incredible.”

Vaughn then looked around at the other soldiers who had jumped with him and those in uniform already on the ground and said: “The Army’s the best…We had a blast. It was incredible, so thank you.”

The YouTube video of Vaughn’s jump ends with him looking into the camera and saying: “Hi. I’m Vince Vaughn, and now I know what ‘Army Strong’ is all about.”

Long before Vaughn talked about feeling Army Strong, he was standing up for this nation where many of Hollywood’s most notable fail to stand. For instance, on the cusp of the invasion of Iraq in 2003, he was in England, where he had to put up with Brits who loathed the United States. He said that when they would badmouth the U.S., his favorite comeback to them was: “[Why don’t you] think about the Marshall Plan a bit and get back to me?” In other words, instead of quietly listening as others insulted America, Vaughn reminded them of the post-WWII economic/infrastructure plan we put in place where we funded the reconstruction of Europe.

I applauded Vaughn for his common sense approach to demonstrating his love for this country’s name and this country’s honor. I also applaud him for standing up for our troops. And I wonder why voices like his are in the minority in Hollywood? Hopefully others will follow Vaughn’s lead and take time to shake a soldier’s hand or stand up for this country when an uppity European socialist insults it.

We’re not asking actors and actresses to tell us who they plan to vote for (or who they think we should vote for). Rather, we’re just asking them to love this country the way we do: the way Vaughn does.