RISKY TALK: Shell of Across the Atlantic Fisks actor Danny Glover, who is upset that he may be dropped as a spokesman by MCI because of his anti-war and anti-American comments.
(An actor who’s anti-liberation and anti-American. As another famous actor once said, I’m shocked. Shocked!)
None of these people are being censored. They are being criticized. And only people so pampered, so spoon-fed with praise and encouragement, could confuse the free speech of others with the chilling of free speech in America.
No other profession in America has this confusion, journalists included.
If I wrote a column supporting the Taliban or pedophiles or whatever, I would suffer professionally in the form of dropped columns and canceled speaking engagements. If a plumber wrote “Down with America” on the side of his van, he would lose customers.
Only Hollywood types believe that we should applaud speaking out as courageous but that those who speak out shouldn’t face any consequences or criticism for what they say. Courage without risk isn’t courage; it’s play-acting. And -sorry, Madonna -a society where elites with huge fortunes and PR machines are immune from criticism isn’t a democracy, it’s an aristocracy for Hollywood know-nothings who spew nonsense whenever they open their mouths.
Ironically, when Elizabeth Hurley crossed a SAG picket-line in 2000, Robbins responded by saying:
“We are bringing Hurley to trial,” he foamed, “She will not get away with it.” Note that “we.” As Mr. Robbins, a prominent supporter of the strike, well knows, his comments are likely to resonate with those union officials responsible for deciding the former fembot’s fate. The consequences of a “guilty” verdict could be serious. The equally influential Ms. Sarandon has supported calls for a lifetime ban on “scab” actors. If the case goes against Ms. Hurley she may never work in Hollywood again.
Cross a SAG picket line, risk being banned from your career for life. But speak out in favor of keeping a brutal dictator in power, expect no consequences.
What an astonishing mindset in Tinseltown.
As a matter of principle, I loathe boycotts and the screeching and self-righteous rhetoric that often accompanies them. I even defended Dr Laura’s show against the mau-mauing gay left. So Scarborough’s campaign leaves me with not a little distaste in my mouth. Still, it’s not McCarthyism. The government is not involved; the argument is a valid one; no-one has a right to be a spokesman for corporate America, without public controversy or opposition. Glover hasn’t been silenced; and he’s free to continue to be an actor, where his views are likely to help, not hinder him. No one would complain if a similarly extreme right-winger were passed over by a major corporation. I don’t like Scarborough’s tactics. But Danny Glover can choose between his views and his corporate contracts. Perhaps, for his ideological consistency, it’s about time he did.
Sullivan’s absolutely right on that last point, but…ideological consistency? From Hollywood?!
Speaking of “self-righteous rhetoric”, I’m sure Glover’s comments about being released as a spokesman by MCI will at a minimum, echo the shrillness of Robbins’, when he was recently disinvited to speak at the Baseball Hall of Fame.