In 2000, Alec Baldwin (actor, activist, and inspiration for the group “People for the Ethical Treatment of Alec Baldwin“) made news for saying he’d leave the country if Bush was elected. Baldwin is still here. This year, Robert Redford said he’d consider moving permanently to his home in Ireland if Bush was elected. He’s still here. There are plenty of other examples.
Why do they not leave? Pretty simple, really. When the rubber hits the road, the Hollywood left stays here because good acting gigs are much harder to come by, and far less lucrative, in socialist or communist countries. They can whine about this nation from Malibu, while making tens of millions acting and directing. Or, they could chastise and belittle the United States from, say, China, while earning 75 Yuan a week for playing the lead in “If They Could See Me Mao” at the Wuhan Community Playhouse.
The freedom to make lots of money trumps any urge to actually be dumb enough to live in a country that practices what they preach.
No, they’re not going anywhere… unfortunately.
From Newsweek Magazine:
Looking for a way to pick up swing voters in the Red States, former President Bill Clinton, in a phone call with Kerry, urged the Senator to back local bans on gay marriage. Kerry respectfully listened, then told his aides, “I’m not going to ever do that.”
Kerry flip-flopped on anything and everything, selling out all personal integrity to adjust his message to whatever audience he happened to be speaking, but he couldn’t manage to choke out a lie to midwesterners about supporting a ban on gay marriage? Why couldn’t he have been “for it before I was against it” on that issue as well?
Could the one time he chose to be honest be the one that cost him the election? What a harsh lesson for future Democrat candidates. Never…ever…refuse to sell yourself out for votes. They’ll never make that mistake again again, I assure you.
In the coming months and years, speculation will fly about Hillary Clinton running for president in 2008. Could the Democrats be moronic enough to nominate another current or former Senator? Let’s see… in recent decades, senators they’ve nominated include McGovern, Mondale, Dukakis, Gore, and Kerry (with Secret Service code-names of, respectively, “Titanic”, “Hindenburg”, “Pompeii”, “Chernobyl”, and “The guy who’s married to the really annoying rich chick”) In short, of course they could be that stupid once again!
In addition to Hillary, Bill Clinton wants to run the UN. In my WorldNetDaily column this week, I imagine a world where Hillary is president, and Bill runs the UN.
Standing in the way of Bill and Hillary ruling the world, is history. Five failed bids for the White House by Senators in the past 30-plus years, and there’s no reason to think it would be any different for Hillary. History is a non-partisan teacher, and the Dems often prove they’ve been playing hooky– And may well again in 2008.
The month of a big election is always a good time to talk presidential politics. Since the death of Ronald Reagan, a lot of talk has taken place about just who has been the best president since WWII. I did an analysis a short while back that I’m now calling “All the Presidents Zen“. What would happen if all the post WWII presidents ran for office in today’s political and social climate? What a mess…
Okay, if Bush “wasn’t really elected president” in 2000 because he “stole” the election, as you all say, does that mean he can run again for what would only be a second term in 2008?
Someday, as historians look back on the 2004 election, I think many of them will ask themselves two questions: 1) How come the pay for historians is so crappy? And, 2) Was Kerry’s loss due to scandals such as this one?