.
11/28/13,
"Famous Hollywood Filmmaker David Mamet Slams Obama: 'He's a Tyrant'," NewsBusters, Scott Whitlock
"Famous
Hollywood filmmaker David Mamet on Monday
dared to oppose liberal orthodoxy, slamming Barack Obama as a "tyrant." Appearing on the
Hugh Hewitt Show, the writer/director (
The Untouchables,
Wag the Dog, Ronin) decried the President's deal with Iran over nuclear production.
Mamet assailed, "
He's a tyrant. And I give him great credit. He's
always said that his idea was to reform the United States." [See video
below. MP3 audio
here.] He
added,
"And, you know, like many tyrants, like Wilson and like Franklin
Delano Roosevelt, he believes that his way is the right way and that
he's going to implement his vision of the world." (In addition to
attacking Obama, you don't see too many directors going after FDR.)"...
[Ed. note: As commenter notes, Obama said he would "
transform" the US, not "reform" as Mamet is quoted saying.]
(continuing): "Just to make things totally clear, the Academy Award-nominated
screenwriter quipped,
"I just disagree with everything [Obama's] done."
Talking to Hewitt, Mamet described his own political views: "I'm a Jew.
I'm for the Jewish people and I'm an American and I'm for the west and
I'm for our allies. And Israel's been under attack for every day of its
existence."
Since Mamet began speaking out with conservative views, he has been labeled "far right" by the
New York Times. [Ed. note: The Times has apparently edited the article. The adjective 'far' has been removed].
In March of 2013, the
Los Angeles Times theater critic railed:
"Mamet has been using the bully pulpit granted to him as an artist to
broadcast the doctrines of loudmouth talk radio, that boisterous realm
in which innuendo substitutes for evidence and fear-mongering replaces
analysis. That's his prerogative as a citizen. But what a shame for
progressives and conservatives alike that such a gifted dramatist has
allowed his hotheaded dogmas to ruin his art."
A partial transcript of the November 25
Hugh Hewitt Show interview:
HUGH HEWITT:
Iran and the United States entered
into a deal. You are a supporter of the state of Israel. You are a new
neo-con, a relatively recent vintage as we talked about when your work,
The Secret Knowledge, came out. This is a terrible moment. It's actually
a terrible moment in world history. What do you think of it?
DAVID MAMET: Well, I was born right after World War II and I'm a Jew.
I'm a serious Jew. My grandparents didn't leave Poland. Got killed, half
of them got killed by the Nazis. Half of them got killed by Stalin and
it's clearly evident to me from the first that the left is going to make
Israel do it's dirty work. It's going to turn its back on Israel until
to save the west, Israel is going to have to strike at Iran and leave
the cat sitting on the fence to say, "See, I told you so. Look at what
them yits are up to this week."
HEWITT: And so, do you think that's going to happen now?
MAMET: Yes.
HEWITT: And will you be upset or will you cheer them when they act?
MAMET: Well, I cheer– you know, I'm a Jew. I'm for the Jewish people
and I'm an American and I'm for the west and I'm for our allies. And
Israel's been under attack for every day of its existence.
HEWITT: Having said that, you're also a child of Hyde Park. You know
these people who are around the President. You probably know the
President's mind better than most. What is he doing?
========================
.
Comment: I agree but credit the lack of a Republican Party for most of Obama's actions. He does what any radical leftist would do with no one to stop him. George Bush #1 and #2 deserve most credit for destroying the GOP. Rupert Murdoch is making sure it stays destroyed.
.
=========================
.
========================
.
"
DisqusIsTerrible 2 days ago
"David Mamet has written about
his conversion from "brain dead liberal" to conservative brilliantly.
His book The Secret Knowledge should be required reading and I highly
recommend buying it for all your liberal friends. His arguments are
cogent, scholarly, and effective. His take down of modern liberalism is
some of the best work out there. The man is a gifted writer and instead
of snarking on him because he used to be *gasp* a Hollywood liberal, we
should welcome him with open arms, especially if conservatives (i.e.
classical liberals) are serious about making our voices heard in
film/television/theatre, a medium that is so overwhelmingly
progressively liberal that it takes real courage for anyone in that
business to speak out against it. And
judging by the comments from
liberals in his field, his conversion has been a bitter pill for them to
swallow."
========================
"Kingfish17
liberalsarefunny
2 days ago
=========================
.
Mamet: "I took the liberal view for many decades, but I believe I have changed my mind.
.
As a child of the '60s, I accepted as an article of faith that government is corrupt, that business is exploitative, and that people are generally good at heart. These
cherished precepts had, over the years, become ingrained as
increasingly impracticable prejudices. Why do I say impracticable?
Because although I still held these beliefs, I no longer applied them in
my life.....
The Constitution, written by men with some experience of actual government, assumes that
- the chief executive will work to be king,
- the Parliament will scheme to sell off the silverware,
- and the judiciary will consider itself Olympian and do everything it can to much improve (destroy) the work of the other two branches.
So
the Constitution pits them against each other, in the attempt not to
achieve stasis, but rather to allow for the constant corrections
necessary to prevent one branch from getting too much power for too
long....
.
Do I speak as a member of the
"privileged class"? If you will—but classes in the United States are
mobile, not static, which is the Marxist view....What
about the role of government? Well, in the abstract, coming from my
time and background, I thought it was a rather good thing, but tallying
up the ledger in those things which affect me and in those things I
observe, I am hard-pressed to see an instance where the intervention of the government led to much beyond sorrow....I recognized that I held those two views of America (politics, government, corporations, the military)....
.
WSJ follow up on Mamet Village Voice piece:
.
"Hollywood does a good job of
policing the public political activities and statements of its
workforce.
.
Step out of its left line, the man comes and take you away.
It helps the policers that
Playwrights, by contrast, have total control over what their scripts say.
.
This, one suspects, affects the two trades' habits of thinking."...
============================
1/28/2013,
"Gun Laws and the Fools of Chelm," David Mamet, Daily Beast
"Karl Marx summed up Communism as “from each according to his ability,
to each according to his needs.” This is a good, pithy saying, which, in
practice, has succeeded in bringing, upon those under its sway, misery,
poverty, rape, torture, slavery, and death.
For the saying implies but does not name the effective agency of its
supposed utopia. The agency is called “The State,” and the motto,
fleshed out, for the benefit of the easily confused must read “The State will take from each according to his ability: the State will give to each according to his needs.” “Needs and abilities” are, of course, subjective. So the operative statement may be reduced to “the State shall take, the State shall give.”...
Rule by bureaucrats and functionaries is an example of the first part of the Marxist equation: that the Government shall determine the individual’s abilities."...
==========================
5/27/2011,
"David Mamet Explains His Shift to the Right," NY Times, Andrew Goldman
===========================
3/29/13,
"The problem with David Mamet," LA Times, Theater critic Charles McNulty
"
Some might argue that Mamet is providing a useful service,
challenging articles of liberal faith from inside the elitist
stronghold. But his contrarian streak, once the source of his
independent vision, has become all too predictable. There's nothing
especially radical in
siding with power over those seeking restitution
for their lack of it....
Writing at the highest level requires an "incandescent" imagination,
one
unencumbered by too much anger or bitterness, as Virginia Woolf
argues in "A Room of One's Own" — a book not likely to be among his
dog-eared college favorites.
Mamet has been using the bully pulpit granted to him as an artist to
broadcast the doctrines of loudmouth talk radio, that boisterous realm
in which
innuendo substitutes for evidence and fear-mongering replaces
analysis. That's his prerogative as a citizen. But what a shame for
progressives and conservatives alike that such a gifted dramatist has
allowed his hotheaded dogmas to ruin his art." (end of article)
No comments:
Post a Comment