As mentioned in previous zomblog posts, Harry Hay (the activist who had “always inspired” Safe Schools Czar Kevin Jennings) once wrote a promotional blurb for a book put out by NAMBLA, the group which seeks to legalize sexual relations between adult men and young boys.
Although there is already a great deal of conclusive evidence showing that Harry Hay was a vigorous supporter and outspoken advocate for NAMBLA and its goals, proof of this additional detail arrived too late to be included in either of my two previous posts on the topic. And so, although it is just a minor component of the case for Hay’s deep connection to NAMBLA, I’ll present it here as a separate post.
I was finally able to track down a copy of the book in question, called A Witchhunt Foiled: The FBI vs. NAMBLA, in the law library at Stanford University (enter the title in the search box at the linked page to see the catalog listing). I obtained the following photographs of the book which indeed do prove beyond any doubt that Harry Hay wrote a promotional blurb for the back cover.
This is a photo of the entire book laid flat. You can see Harry Hay’s blurb in situ at the bottom of the back cover.
And this photo shows a close-up of Hay’s pro-NAMBLA blurb. The quote itself is fairly rambling, but concludes with,
“Thank you, NAMBLA, for giving me the space to express my appreciation for your travail.”
Inside, NAMBLA printed its self-described mission statement, which is to help and facilitate “men and boys involved in consensual sexual and emotional relationships with each other,” a stance which Harry Hay apparently endorsed.
A Witchhunt Foiled was written and published by the North American Man/Boy Love Association in 1985. It concerned an FBI investigation of NAMBLA in relation to an early-’80s missing-child case — an investigation which eventually turned up nothing relevant (which is why NAMBLA refers to it as a “witchhunt”).
As an interesting sidenote, unconnected to the Harry Hay blurb…
I just noticed that famed “in-your-face” sex activist Pat Califia was one of the other people who wrote a blurb for the book’s back cover.
Pat Califia is well-known as a NAMBLA supporter and pedophilia advocate who once wrote “Instead of condemning pedophiles for their involvement with lesbian and gay youth, we should be supporting them.”
That part is common knowledge.
What is less known is that when Kevin Jennings sought out a publisher for his first three books, he chose — of all the publishers in the world — Pat Califia’s publisher, Alyson Publications. As a result, Kevin Jennings’ books came out under the same imprint as Pat Califia’s books such as Macho Sluts, a collection by Califia which contains a short story about an incestuous S/M sexual relationship between a mother and her 13-year-old daughter, now considered a classic of taboo sadism porn.
Alyson was also famous as just about the only publisher in America that would release pro-pedophilia books by other authors, such as Pedophilia: The Radical Case by Tom O’Carrol, and The Age Taboo: Gay Male Sexuality, Power and Consent, by Dan Tsang.
Kevin Jennings’ first three books were all subsequently published by Alyson as well: Becoming Visible; One Teacher in 10; and Telling Tales Out of School.
Why Kevin Jennings thought it was appropriate to have his books published by the same company that also publishes pro-pedophila books is anyone’s guess. While it is true that Alyson has since that time published more titles aimed toward the mainstream by other well-known activists, it still seems to be a serious lapse in judgment on Jennings’ part. Authors can often be “typecast” by the publishing company they choose: for example, if you chose to have your book published by the imprint Sentinel, you would be generally identified as a conservative or right-wing author. And so on, with many specialized imprints and publishing houses. Jennings was a good enough writer that he undoubtedly could have approached any number of other, less controversial publishing companies.
Jennings continues to exacerbate the growing scandals by remaining silent on all these issues. With new stories breaking almost every day (including, for example, his connection to the radical activist group ACT-UP), he would be well-advised to publicly disassociate himself from his past and make a clean break with some of the questionable associations that continue to dog him.
Th following two images, of the book’s cover and title page, are only provided here as an appendix, and to dispel any doubts that this is a real book:
(Note: This is not a photo of me, but rather
1Ken on Oct 22, 2009 at 6:02 pm:
I have a great deal of respect for the very thorough research you do.
I’ve been curious, though, as to why the recent articles about Harry Hay haven’t been posted on the main Zombietime page. I understand if you consider that to be mostly a collection of pictures and documents of protests and whatnot and Zomblog to be more textual and research-based, but you posted the John Holdren stuff on the main page and it’s pretty much the same kind of article as the recent ones (content-wise). Any particular reason for putting it on here and not the main page? Length, maybe?
Quote
2zombie on Oct 22, 2009 at 6:25 pm:
Yes, mostly it’s got to do with length. Longer articles go on zombietime, shorter articles and “quickie posts” go on zomblog.
There’s no specific maximum or minimum length or number of photos, but anything 12-ish pictures and under will go on zomblog, and 20-ish pictures or more will go on zombietime; anything in between is a coin toss.
Also, another general guideline is: Photos by me in large reports go on zombietime; photos by others, or scans, go on zomblog — unless it is a huge post (such as the first Holdren post).
That’s about it. Basically, it just comes down to which way feels right.
Quote
3zombie on Oct 22, 2009 at 6:30 pm:
Also:
I’m getting a big barrage of spam comments coming in, some of which are starting to leak through the spam filter, and requiring me to individually delete them on all the dead threads (and new threads). As a result, for now I’m going to turn on the “moderate comments” button for a while, which will mean that when you post a comment, there will likely be a delay (ranging between one minute and over an hour, or whenever I remember to check the moderation panel) before it appears.
Sorry about that — hopefully it will be just a temporary inconvenience.
Besides, since this is a “minor” post, I’m doing nothing to promote it, so it likely will get only a few comments anyway.
Quote
4stuiec on Oct 22, 2009 at 8:01 pm:
I found out today that my 15-year-old daughter knows what NAMBLA is and why it’s so reprehensible. Makes my heart glad.
Quote
5Rose on Oct 22, 2009 at 8:45 pm:
I sure hope people are paying attention. Good hunting, zombie.
Quote
6Bite Me! Comics on Oct 22, 2009 at 8:58 pm:
Great work as usual, Zombie!
Quote
7CattusMagnus on Oct 23, 2009 at 12:19 am:
Zombie,
Day-um! You really are connecting all the dots. If your last post regarding Harry Hay didn’t convince people of his connection with NAMBLA than this one sure will. The line, “Thank you NAMBLA . . . . ” sends a shiver down my spine. And the “safe schools” czar sure picked a nice publisher. Unbelievable. Thanks for all the effort that you have put into this investigation. You’re doing a great service.
Good girl. Looks like you’ve raised an independent thinker.
Quote
8Guy Average on Oct 23, 2009 at 6:42 am:
Spam is just plain annoying!
Based on your last several posts, I’d say you underestimate the number of posts that you will get. I’d estimate from here going forward that “a few comments” will be a relative term that means many more comments than it would have, say, a few months ago. That’s a good thing, IMHO. The information that you post needs to be known widely, I think, especially since you do a very thorough job of researching and developing each post.
Thanks Zombie!
Quote
9Roscoe on Oct 23, 2009 at 7:12 am:
Is it just me or is this guy, Harry Hay, a very, very, very bad writer? “……our forward cutting edges toward……..” I’m a far cry from an English teacher but this seems to me to be a bizarre feature in an otherwise mostly incomprehensible sentence……..
Quote
10Marauder on Oct 23, 2009 at 7:44 am:
I had no idea Alyson had a reputation for publishing books in support of pedophilia. Eeek.
I did really like “Telling Tales Out of School”, though - lots of interesting stories from different generations about growing up gay. It’s too bad Kevin Jennings is apparently dumb enough to publically idolize Harry Hay and let that fact threaten to undo the good things he (KJ) has done in the past.
Quote
11Bolero on Oct 23, 2009 at 8:37 am:
Great research Zombie! And you found further link to paedophilia to boot!! The choice of Jenning’s publisher!
Quote
12pat on Oct 23, 2009 at 10:13 am:
Media Matter Mutters Maledictions at Zombie.
Quote
13Manny on Oct 23, 2009 at 10:23 am:
Don’t forget Alyson’s porn collection. Just a few titles:
· Dorm Porn: Raunchy Tales Of Boys On Campus
· Lesbian Sadomasochism Safety Manual
· Doing It for Daddy: Short Sexy Fiction About a Very Forbidden Fantasy
· Secret Slaves: Erotic stories of bondage
· Hu$tler$: Erotic stories of sex for hire
· My First Time (“men… describing their first consensual [hmm…] same-sex experience”)
· First Timers: True stories of lesbian awakening (“first-time strap-ons, spankings, and role-playing”)
Go well with their kiddie books: Heather Has 2 Mommies, and Daddy’s Roommate.
Quote
14Zimriel on Oct 23, 2009 at 10:49 am:
Maraduer 10, yeah, that’s a problem. Any *activist* publishing outfit has to cater to activists. Since activism attracts sociopaths, a nontrivial number of books by the activist publisher will be evil.
Take Regnery. Say a mainstream conservative wants to publish a book. He would consider Regnery as a prolific publisher with similar interests. But Regnery puts out a number of books of questionable content; in 1996, for instance, “Inventing the AIDS Virus” by Peter Duesberg. (And then there are the Politically Incorrect Guides…) Someone who gets published by Regnery faces a real risk of being dismissed by association as a nut bar.
Quote
15Zimriel on Oct 23, 2009 at 10:56 am:
“Telling Tales Out of School”, though - lots of interesting stories from different generations about growing up gay
That might explain Alyson’s interest - it’s the childhood angle as much as the homosexual angle.
But I agree the gay community has a need for that sort of book. It just needs a book which DOESN’T sport the PedoBear Stamp Of Approval. How come that book couldn’t get a publisher from a decent press?
I think the takeaway from all this has to be, if you are a prospective author then BE CAREFUL.
Quote
16Rose on Oct 23, 2009 at 11:23 am:
Presumably when a person puts their name to something, such as the intro to a book, they are proud of it. Trying to run from it later isn’t wise. Pointing it out is only fair. The rest of us can make up our minds - is Jennings what we want anywhere near our kids? The answer is resoundingly “No.” He can still be proud of himself all he wants. Just not as a “Safe Schools Czar.” Are you kidding me?
By the same token people who attend rallies and protests are attending a public function, and are presumably proud to be there, or at least committed enough to the cause to attend. In some cases, they have made a decision that their convictions are strong enough they will go even if it means arrest for civil disobedience. For them to later whine and try to weasel out of the fines and/or sentences for doing so is wrong. Have the courage of your convictions.
And again, by that same token, if you are attending a public protest, there are cameras all around, news media all around. There is no reason for animosity towards a person whose blog captures that moment in history.
It seems the people who are anti-zombie are also against the facts being told.
Like the fact that Jennings’ past shows him to be a certain kind of person, with a certain kind of ideology. Facts threaten the spin, and threaten the activist agenda, no question there.
But thank God there are still people like Zombie willing to present the facts, not just parrot the spin. Be proud, zombie. They cannot hurt you.
Quote
17Syrah on Oct 23, 2009 at 1:27 pm:
The problem with looking under stones is that you never know what will come crawling out.
Zombie and Fox, doing what the MSM are afraid to do.
Quote
18Finally Free on Oct 23, 2009 at 3:04 pm:
And Zombie marches on. Two cheers!
Quote
19stuiec on Oct 23, 2009 at 9:00 pm:
I guess this is as good a time as any for my 3 N’s spiel.
The 3 N’s are:
- Natural
- Normal
- Normative
Various biological conditions and traits occur naturally. In humans, eyes can be brown, blue, green, hazel, violet or other colors. Hair can be black, brown, red, blonde, straight or curly.
Some natural conditions are definitely detrimental to the survival of the individual. Anencephaly, Tay-Sachs, and other such conditions are invariably fatal.
Other natural conditions are unusual but not detrimental to the survival of the individual. Polydactyly, for example: some children will be born with six fingers on one or both hands, which gives them neither an advantage nor a disadvantage in survival and reproduction.
Some traits and conditions are considered normal. It’s normal to have blue eyes, though blue eyes are far less common than brown. It’s normal to have five fingers on each hand.
But even if a trait like polydactyly may not be considered normal, it’s neither something monstrous or horrible. It’s a deviation from biological normalcy, but as it doesn’t impair the ability of the individual to live a normal life, it’s not considered a defect (not like spina bifida or Downs Syndrome).
However, even though polydactyly is natural and such a mild deviation from normal that it can’t be considered a defect, it’s still not normative. There shouldn’t be a government mandate that all gloves have six fingers in order to ensure that polydactyls aren’t discriminated against. If we need special programs to educate our children about polydactyls, those programs should emphasize that when nature produces such differences in individuals, that doesn’t make the individuals monsters or freaks, just different. We should teach our children not to point and laugh at six-fingered people, not to beat them up, not to tease and torment them.
But we don’t need programs to strap an extra finger onto all of our children to let them experience life as a polydactyl. We don’t need to create a polydactyl community to advocate for sixfinger rights so that every aspect of our lives is adapted for six-fingered people. It may be perfectly natural for a person to be born with six fingers, it may be considered effectively normal, but that doesn’t mean that society has to create rules to enforce its acceptance as normative.
Quote
20Bolero on Oct 24, 2009 at 1:28 am:
zimriel, I read Peter Duesberg and i found it interesting. He is a virologist at UC Berkeley and he was a persona non grata in scientifical circles due to his theories….
Quote
21Throbert McGee on Oct 24, 2009 at 5:38 am:
Note that his first two books (Becoming Visible and One Teacher in Ten) were published in 1994 when Jennings was a 30-year-old nobody — he had no reputation to help sell his books to a major publishing company, but his lack of established reputation meant he had no reason to be extra-careful about vetting to make sure that he wasn’t endangering his valuable brand (i.e., what GLSEN would later become) by letting it come within [small-number] degrees of separation from a pro-pedophilia book.
Thus, in 1994, it made a great deal of sense for him to go with a niche firm like Alyson — whose reputation is first and foremost as being a “Gay Community” publisher.
Speaking of brand-protection, the three overtly pro-pedophilia books that Zombie mentions — not counting 1988’s Macho Sluts, which was primarily a BDSM-themed book — were from 1981, 1982, and 1985. In other words, the “Alyson” brand itself was less valuable than it would later become (although even today it’s a small niche publisher). And more importantly, “Alyson” had not yet hit the mainstream media’s radar as the publisher of such mega-controversy titles as Daddy’s Roommate and Heather Has Two Mommies, which were both released under a new spin-off imprint “Alyson Wonderland” circa 1990.
All that said, it made a lot less sense (six-years’-worth-of-work less) for Jennings to have returned to Alyson in 2000, when Telling Tales Out of School was published.
Quote
22Throbert McGee on Oct 24, 2009 at 6:01 am:
“We” who?
(Art thou speaking in the manner of a Gentile who proclaims that “We don’t need to create groups advocating for Jewish rights”? If so, speakest for thyself only.)
Quote
23J Starr on Oct 24, 2009 at 6:15 am:
Oh there’s plenty more out there about Kevin Jennings, with or without NAMBLA. Keep digging Zombie.
Quote
24Throbert McGee on Oct 24, 2009 at 6:17 am:
Following up: I’m fairly certain that stuiec WAS speaking in exactly this manner — if he had six-finger polydactyly, he logically should’ve written: “We don’t need to create a polydactyl community to advocate for sixfinger rights so that every aspect of other people’s lives is adapted for us six-fingered types.”
Now, assuming stuiec has five fingers (per hand!), it’d be totally reasonable for him to write: “Those six-fingered people should not advocate for laws requiring me to pretend that I think of polydactyly as normal.” In fact, speaking as a “six-fingered” person, I’d publicly back stuiec up on the above statement.
But subsuming “I and they” into a single “we” is not so defensible, and if it’s not clear why, refer back to my example of a Gentile pontificating on the non-necessity of Jewish-rights organizations.
Quote
25J Starr on Oct 24, 2009 at 6:19 am:
BTW, I had posted a long comment with lots of links on your first Jennings post but it has not appeared.
You would do well to google up ‘fistgate’ and note the Jennings connection; elsewhere you may also note that our friend Bill Ayers also appears in association with a Jennings’ book.
Quote
26Starless on Oct 24, 2009 at 7:39 am:
I like how Hay carefully avoids putting his stamp of approval on NAMBLA’s core “mission”, but instead tries to focus on the idea that somehow the very act of pushing boundaries and challenging norms is praiseworthy. Hey, who are we to judge? GLAAD, NAMBLA, it’s all the same in Hay’s world, apparently.
The more details come out about this guy, it’s obvious that his advocacy was less about gay rights and more about “if it feels good, do it” rights.
He’s using academic progresso-speak, where “complex” is often deliberately confused with “incomprehensible”. See, if you don’t understand it, it doesn’t mean that the writer is writing nonsense, it means that you’re not smart enough to get it.
Quote
27Starless on Oct 24, 2009 at 7:46 am:
Ken, OT from the previous discussion: IIRC, Charlie Sheen wrote up some fictional intellectually masturbatory bit about him discussing 9/11 Trutherism with Obama. The guy’s a nut and has sullied the fine work he did in the Hot Shots movies. Fluffy Bunny Feet, indeed.
Quote
28zombie on Oct 24, 2009 at 8:37 am:
My spam filter is set to reject any comment with 3 or more links in it. Having lots of links is a hallmark of a spam comment. So that’s why your comment never appeared.
However, the filter is still not strong enough, as many others would be appearing if I hadn’t turned on “moderation’ mode. Just in the last 60 seconds I see “Generic xanax. Xanax….”, “Я думаю, что Вы допускаете ошибку,” “Phentermine adipex. Adipex for sale. Adipex,” “asian sex videos free petite naked,” “Single in Arizona? - Book a date online today,” “Cheapest place to buy viagra,” and numerous others pouring in, many of which would have somehow snuck through and appeared, mostly on dead threads. I’m trying to fiddle with the spam filter now to prevent this, but to do so I need to make it so extra-strict that it will likely also catch many legitimate comments, which is problematic.
Something happened recently to increase my spam assault many-fold. I think it may have something to do with me having the word “NAMBLA” in my posts, which apparently all the spambots detect, and they rush over here like lemmings, since they’re probably programmed to assume that any site that has a “sex-oriented” word in its posts is open territory for spamming.
Anyway, for now I’ll leave modertation “on” until I figure out a way to arrive at a happy medium. Sorry about your multi-link comment disappearing. You can try again with just two links per comment.
But now I’m beginning to see why most blogs require registration or moderation for comments.
Quote
29Dianna on Oct 24, 2009 at 9:09 am:
Zombie, just now and then, spam makes me laugh. Not very often, but now and then.
A guy I knew finally gave up having an email account because of the spam.
Quote
30stuiec on Oct 24, 2009 at 10:34 am:
No, I am speaking as a Jew who doesn’t understand why so many of my co-religionists promote idiotic causes like hunting down Christmas trees and manger scenes in public spaces. We live in a country where being Jewish is natural, normal and definitely not normative.
Note also that until the advent of the ACLU, there was the Anti-Defamation League of B’nai B’rith. Not the You Have to Dismantle Christianity League or the You Have to Give Judaism Equal Time League, just an organization dedicated to combatting defamation and negative stereotypes of Jews, with the goal of Jews being allowed to live unmolested as American citizens.
My daughter — the one who’s now aware of NAMBLA’s evil and the one who also penned an editorial for her middle-school newspaper denouncing homophobia and bullying and taunting of her gay classmates — once observed on a drive through our town, in the December of the year when she was three, that all our lampposts were wrapped in tinsel to make them look like candy canes. She asked, “When do they put up the Hanukkah decorations?” I explained that they don’t: we live in a country where the vast majority of people are Christian and where there are very few Jews, and only in a few places where lots of Jews live close together would you see Hanukkah decorations. I explained that in Israel, the Jewish country, there are public displays for Jewish holidays.
By the way, she also now knows that, far from being a totally secular jolly generic winter holiday symbol, candy canes are among the most Christian of Christmas symbols. Where the tree comes from Nordic winter solstice traditions, the candy cane is the Shepherd’s crook striped with the Blood of the Lamb. Yet the morons in public schools who diligently try to excise mentions of Christ from the Winter Break and who object to the kids in the school choral group singing carols with religious content merrily hand out candy canes, oblivious to the deep religious significance of their shape and coloration.
Quote
31CattusMagnus on Oct 24, 2009 at 2:14 pm:
I noticed this too. I just think he’s really straining to write something profound or sound elegant somehow.
Quote
32Starless on Oct 24, 2009 at 2:31 pm:
stuiec, I’m personally outraged that the Festivus Pole doesn’t get equal time. What about the holiday for the rest of us? That’s what I want to know.
Quote
33Throbert McGee on Oct 24, 2009 at 6:14 pm:
Zombie’s spam filter catches:
Literally, this means “I think that you are permitting a mistake,” and if it had actually been written by a native speaker of Russian, I would take it to be an idiomatic way of saying either “I think you’ve made an erroneous assumption,” or “I think that you’re conceding an error.”
But since it’s spam, I suspect that it was machine-translated into Russian from another language and that the intended meaning was simply “I think you’re making a mistake [if you don't try our herbal V¡agra, or whatever].”
Quote
34Throbert McGee on Oct 24, 2009 at 6:48 pm:
Well, that’s fair enough, and I think I’m kind of on the same page with you, as a homo who thinks that “gay rights activism” hasn’t really been about rights since SCOTUS formally voided the remaining state laws against consensual adult sodomy with Lawrence v. Texas.
But even so, “we” language ought to be used sparingly and carefully in political contexts, and whenever one is inclined to use it (e.g., Why can’t we Americans stop picking our noses and eating our own boogers?, it’s not a bad idea to stop and mentally replace the “we/us/our” constructions with “I and they” or “I and y’all” or “I and other people.” And then ask yourself, “Am I really prepared to stand behind a question like Why can’t I and you readers out there stop eating boogers?” Would it be more honest to say either Why can’t I personally stop picking my own nose and eating it? or Why can’t you booger-eating freaks stop doing it?
Stopping to analyze and self-edit your use of “we/us/our” when writing can help avoid the “We who, white man?” responses.
Quote
35stuiec on Oct 24, 2009 at 7:26 pm:
Yeah, but the Kevin Jennings of the world want all of us — every American — to go through the appropriate anti-hate indoctrination. He’s obsessed with his identity as a gay man, and he assumes that everyone else in America — all of us — are equally obsessed with his identity as a gay man.
Similarly, we all — all Americans — have to tiptoe around President Obama’s incompetence, mendacity and Leftist commitment: if any of us speak out, we get tarred as racists. We — all of us — are presumed racist until proven innocent, and of course we can’t prove the negative. Case in point: the President lies from the podium of the House of Representatives, a Representative calls him on it (rudely and in violation of Congressional protocol), and a pundit claims she knew in her mind that he intended to include the epithet “boy” in his ejaculation. The folks like her on the Left assume that the only lens through which any American can or should view Barack Obama is the lens of race, seeing him not as The President but as The First African-American President: they are so race-obsessed that they assume we, all of us, are equally race-obsessed.
We — all of us — are instructed by advocates for various rights groups that if we do not think in the politically correct, societally mandated manner, we are haters, bigots, un-American, inciters to murder….
Quote
36Throbert McGee on Oct 24, 2009 at 7:26 pm:
By the way, the back-cover blurb by Scott Tucker (never hoid of ‘im) is worth quoting in full, because anyone who hangs around long enough on atheist and/or libertarian forums is going to encounter pedo-trolls saying THIS EXACT SAME SHIT:
Based on a little Googling, I suspect that Scott Tucker was writing here from the perspective of a very young adult who just a few years earlier had been a horny and willing teenage “catamite” for a much older man.
Quote
37Throbert McGee on Oct 24, 2009 at 7:49 pm:
J Starr, there was a discussion of Fistgate several days ago, on the “Memo to Media Matters” thread.
Quote
38Throbert McGee on Oct 24, 2009 at 7:59 pm:
Oops, forgot to add: …but also based on Googling, circa 2000 (which is to say, 15 years after he wrote that blurb for A Witchhunt Foiled), Scott Tucker was still deeply immersed in progressive politics and Queer identity, so there’s not much reason to think that he would’ve recanted his earlier position that age-of-consent laws are a form of sexual abuse.
Quote
39Ken on Oct 24, 2009 at 10:55 pm:
The guy’s a nut and has sullied the fine work he did in the Hot Shots movies
Starless,
Ha! Funny as they were, if that is the high-point of his career then he can only hang his head in shame.
Brings to mind something I thought when I saw Sean Penn in Venezeula on TV once. He said something about how he was on a “fact-finding” mission or whatever…I was just waiting for him to go, “AWESOME! TOTALLY AWESOME!” and congratulate Chavez on hurling a pot of hot coffee in someone’s face. Alas, didn’t happen.
They may have sung “Wooly Bully” together, though. I didn’t watch the whole report…
Quote
40zombie on Oct 25, 2009 at 12:31 am:
New thread!
Quote
41Starless on Oct 25, 2009 at 5:14 am:
In reviewing his body of work, I think you’ll find that they were the high-point of his career.
“Chavez, dude, my dad’s a t.v. repairman. He’s got this ultimate set of tools. I can totally fix your problems with the media.”
To be fair, Penn has shown some acting skill, which mitigates some of his idiotic political ranting.
Quote
42Ken on Oct 25, 2009 at 4:38 pm:
In reviewing his body of work, I think you’ll find that they were the high-point of his career.
Yes, there was much more depth to that Topper Harley role than in his “guy bombed out of his mind in the police station” role from “Ferris Bueller’s Day Off.” Maybe if that bomb he dropped on Saddam Hussein in “Hot Shots: Part Deux” had actually worked the world wouldn’t be in such a bad state these days? He might have even won the Nobel Peace Prize….
Penn has shown some acting skill
Yes, yes, ok, I’ll give him that. He wasn’t too bad in “Colors.” But I can’t take him seriously when it comes to politics, even if I am softer on Cuba or Venezuela than the next guy. I just can’t buy celebrities who become politically active. It’s such a sham.
“Chavez, dude, my dad’s a t.v. repairman. He’s got this ultimate set of tools. I can totally fix your problems with the media.”
That was gold. I got a stomach cramp from laughing so hard.
Quote
43arhooley on Oct 25, 2009 at 10:46 pm:
Zombie, you da bombie.
And this seems to have fallen even out of FOX News, just as Anita Dunn comes around. Are we giving up because we can’t keep up?
Quote
44Starless on Oct 26, 2009 at 5:22 am:
I think there’s a baseline assumption we have to make, which is that 99% of celebrities, when they open their mouths to the media about something outside of their professional field, are idiots. But there is a continuum which progresses as an inverse relationship between the extent of their talent and the extent to which we are, or at least I am, able to ignore their idiocy. Alec Baldwin, for example, says some of the most moronic things imaginable about politics, yet his skill as an actor is such that I’m willing to forget whatever stupid thing he’s currently going on about in the press. If for nothing else, his Barney Frank impression gets him off the hook for just about every stupid appearance he makes on political chat shows.
Then again, sometimes I wonder if I’m completely wrong and most celebrities are actually crafty publicity hounds following the Mae West dictum.
Quote
45Timothy (TRiG) on Oct 28, 2009 at 5:45 pm:
I’m not American, and haven’t really been following the Kevin Jennings saga. My friend Emily has been and has a little to say about it.
***
Well, quite. Society doesn’t need to enforce these rules, because society gets on fine without them. And while hexadactyl (or, to take a more common example, left-handed) people may have certain difficulties in a pentadactyl and dextrous world, no one (nowadays) calls them evil, sinister. That battle’s been won.
The battle for gay acceptance, I’m afraid, has not been won. In a perfect world, special programmes would not be needed. As it is, let’s deal with the real world.
Theoretically, all forms of bullying are equally bad: making fun of redheads is just as wrong as taunting gays. In practice, redheaded kids aren’t getting nearly as much abuse, and aren’t getting screwed up inside by it. Step down from your theoretical abstraction and enter the real world for a minute. By all means let us have comprehensive, fully inclusive anti-bullying programmes; but let’s also concentrate most energy on the forms of bullying that actually happen.
As Emily writes,
TRiG.
(Disclaimer: I am most definitely not a libertarian.)
Quote