Hollywood's Monied Liberals And The President

It's a cliche, a stereotype that many folks love to trot out: Hollywood is full of liberal socialists, Democrats to the core, and their big money elitism has left them out of touch with the much more conservative American populace.

I can see where that image comes from. Of course it's full of holes. Big time actors/producers like Clint Eastwood, Jerry Bruckheimer, Jon Voight, Gary Sinise, Mel Gibson, Kelsey Grammer, Tom Selleck, and many more are self-described conservative/Republicans. And the bottom line is still the bottom line - money rules Tinseltown, no matter what the political persuasion of the creators.

But Hollywood is made up of people, and people who have enthusiastically committed (and contributed) to a political candidate are loath to give up that support even when their standard-bearer has let them down. And by this point in his presidency, are there any progressive/liberal causes that Mr. Obama has not let down?

That's why this story, "Obama And Hollywood: State Of Their Union" from The Hollywood Reporter, is so interesting. The richest political progressives in Hollywood gathered recently to raise money for Mr. Obama. And while they still support him, many are disappointed. "He had an opportunity to show he's a different generation, and he hasn't done it," said on interviewee. Hollywood liberals are disappointed that war continues in the Middle East, concerned that health care and Wall Street reforms are toothless, and upset that gay rights are not high on the Administration's agenda.

But no one among the many folks interviewed here are ready to throw in the towel. Of course, none of these extremely creative, imaginative people - whose movies and tv shows often dazzle with their unique ideas - seem able to visualize an America with more than two political parties.

Maybe that's because every one of these Hollywood entertainment industry players is ultimately in the employ of, or partnered with, major media corporations. They know the difficulties artists encounter when their creativity challenges the money men. And we all know where corporate America stands when it comes to progressive change.

http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/hr/content_display/news/e3i4a25a9f106904fc175e55b8dcf6b2e3e

Speaking The Truth - On The State Of The Democrat Party

"We have to be more defined as being on the side of the people and not on the side of interest groups that are so entrenched. And we can't do that by playing patty-cake with Wall Street, by caving into the demands of big banks, by playing footsie with insurance companies and by jumping in bed with the pharmaceutical industry." - Rep. Dennis Kucinich (D) on his political party.

Speaking the truth, usually unvarnished and clear-eyed, is Representative Dennis Kucinich's stock-in-trade. Thankfully, the voters of his Cleveland district keep returning him to Congress.

Rep. Kucinich, in this interview, outlines his view on the state of the Democratic Party - essential reading.

http://rawstory.com/2010/01/exclusive-kucinich-shreds-democrats/

Kucinich Votes "No" On Health Care Reform

Representative Dennis Kucinich (D-OH) is the sponsor of HR 676, the Single-Payer health care reform measure that was roundly ignored or denigrated by the mainstream media and corporate lobbyists.

Kucinich is one of the Democrats who voted against the recently passed House health care reform bill (H.R. 3962), and not because of the silly, ignorant reasons given by many legislators who also voted "no" - rationales like "government takeover", "socialism", "bureaucrats making decisions instead of individuals", etc. He voted "no" because H.R. 3962 does little to help citizens while further entrenching and enriching the insurance companies who want to continue the uniquely American system of health-care-for-profit.

Essential reading: here's Mr. Kucinich's reasons for voting against this "reform."

http://www.kucinich.house.gov/News/DocumentSingle.aspx?DocumentID=153995

And while you're there, take in Mr. Kucinich's excellent short article pondering the question "Why do we have finite resources for health care but unlimited money for war?" As he says in the article: "...a Democratic version of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan is no more acceptable than a Republican version of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan."

http://www.kucinich.house.gov/News/DocumentSingle.aspx?DocumentID=153461

Americans Don't Want War In Afghanistan, But Does It Really Matter What They Want?

Will the GOP become the anti-war party in 2010? They threatened an earlier war funding bill tghis year with their purely partisan opposition. Public support for the Democrat-led expansion of the Afghanistan occupation/war is dwindling, according to many reports released today. How will Democratic legislators explain their support for ongoing Middle East war after years of decrying the Bush/Republican invasion/occupation? Here's the CNN story:
http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2009/09/01/cnn-poll-afghanistan-war-opposition-at-all-time-high/

And McClatchy News is reporting that a rift is developing between the military and the administration on expanding the war. How is this going to set with the energy companies that need their oil pipelines/infrastructure located in a politically friendly Afghanistan? More troops are required, but "the additional troops are 'only a down payment on what would be required to turn things around, and everyone knows that,' said another senior military official."

Nice to see that American military lives are measured in terms of future payments for the profit of Big Oil. And that these same lives are a political football in Washington - that will be cold comfort for the mourning families of military men and women killed in the meantime.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/mcclatchy/3303057

If President Obama really wants to create change, he could start by doing the morally correct thing - replace all those troops and contractors in Iraq and Afghanistan with humanitarian aid and capital for civic improvements like hospitals, schools and power/communications plants. Think that is an option that will be discussed in Washington?

Kucinich: Insurance Care!

You've gotta be a tough traveler to hang with these guys - they go down the bumpiest roads.


Representative Dennis Kucinich, one of just a handful of heroes in Congress, on "Health Care Wanted: Dead Or Alive." Cogent, honest analysis and a call for single payer/Medicare-for-all health care.

"The Administration plan requires that everyone must have health insurance, so it is delivering tens of millions of new "customers" to the insurance companies. Health care? Not really. Insurance care! Absolutely. Cost controls? No chance."


Essential reading at: http://kucinich.us/index.php

Nader Was Right

"We owe Ralph Nader, Cynthia McKinney and the Green Party an apology. They were right. If a few million of us had had the temerity to stand behind our ideals rather than our illusions and the empty slogans peddled by the Obama campaign, we would have a platform. We forgot that social reform never comes from accommodating the power structure but from frightening it. "

I voted for Mr. Nader for President in 2008 and 2004, and had the privilege of hearing him speak twice. The second time, in October 2008 with the Obama campaign in the driver's seat, his talk included some of the topics he touches on in this interview.

Chris Hedges interviews Mr. Nader on why the Progessive/Liberal movement cannot count on the Democratic Party - their chance to exercise influence was lost when they rapturously embraced Obama with no questions asked:

http://www.truthdig.com/report/item/20090810_nader_was_right_liberals_are_going_nowhere_with_obama/