Faking Courageous

When actors fake…

Writer, lawyer, actor, and economist Ben Stein notes that–with regard to the Oscar show the other night–"there was not one word of tribute, not one breath, to our fighting men and women in Iraq and Afghanistan or to their families or their widows or orphans.

I guess that since he’s an actor himself, he was uniquely perched to identify the narcissistic charade put on by Hollywood:

The idea that it is brave to stand up for gays in Hollywood, to stand up against Joe McCarthy in Hollywood (fifty years after his death), to say that rich white people are bad, that oil companies are evil — this is nonsense. All of these are mainstream ideas in Hollywood, always have been, always will be. For the people who made movies denouncing Big Oil, worshiping gays, mocking the rich to think of themselves as brave — this is pathetic, childish narcissism.

The brave guy in Hollywood will be the one who says that this is a fabulously great country where we treat gays, blacks, and everyone else as equal. The courageous writer in Hollywood will be the one who says the oil companies do their best in a very hostile world to bring us energy cheaply and efficiently and with a minimum of corruption. The producer who really has guts will be the one who says that Wall Street, despite its flaws, has done the best job of democratizing wealth ever in the history of mankind.

I advise everyone to not go holding their breath.

 


Since Covid killed my Cabo San Lucas vacation-rental business in 2021, this is my day job. I can't do it without you. Memberships are $10 monthly, $20 quarterly, or $65 annually. Two premium coffees per month. Every membership helps finance this work I do, and if you like what I do, please chip in. No grandiose pitches.

13 Comments

  1. Brad on March 9, 2006 at 19:00

    So in summation, "if you don't do exactly as I wish, you hate America."

    Must be a Republican blog. Too bad BlogExplosion only lets me block 50 sites.

  2. OTTMANN on March 9, 2006 at 20:14

    The script readers are all fakes, pretending to be real people. They suck-up to the liberal agenda while doing the opposite. Most of them don't give a rats rear end about anyone but themselves and their money. Look at Marin Sheen for instance, a hater of war and the president who makes his living off portraying a soldier and the Commander in Chief. He's the ultimate hypocrite!

    Take the make-up and camera away, and they're nothing!

  3. EKENYERENGOZI MICHAEL CHIMA on March 10, 2006 at 02:39

    If Ben Stein is ready, I can produce a film on the American heroes of the war in Iraq and Afghanistan.

    The best way to recognize and appreciate their heroic sacrifice for America is not by paying lip service to them, but by producing a heroic classic film like my work-in-progress documentary "White Crosses Across America".

    Ben Stein can be one of my executive producers and stop lamenting.

  4. Richard Nikoley on March 10, 2006 at 10:31

    "No one who objects to the war in Iraq for whatever reasons is disrespecting the servicemen who actually have to go and serve there"

    This is without doubt the biggest lie out there, since this whole thing began. Anyone who "objects to the war" but claims to "support the troops" is either a moron, or is just fat out lying.

    My support for these troops stems from the imperative to kill as many radical Islamists–who have vowed to preemptively kill us–as soon as possible.

    I want to see slaughter. Lots and lots and lots of it. Several hundred thousand ought to do the trick in pacifying the lot of those primitive savages, over there. And if it doesn't, give me a few hundred thousand more.

    They are welcome to renounce their oath to kill us at any time, and should they do that, sincerely, then the killing should stop, immediately. They are welcome to their primitive, evolutionary-stunted, ape-like ways. They are not welcome to force those ways upon me, and when they vow to kill me because I refuse to become the blithering religious morons they have already demonstrated themselves to be, then my only rational recourse is to see to their obliteration as best and as fast as I can.

    I have said it again and again: It is morally imperative to kill anyone who threatens to kill you and means it (and they certainly do). Those who refuse to acknowledge that are juvenile imbeciles, which counts for most of the left. They’re dangerous and should never be left unattended anywhere near another human life. They have default upon the "human" part and are incompetent major areas of what the concept of "life" implies.

    Those risking their lives for me in that most sacred of human moral responsibilities (competent and effective self defense) command my utmost respect.

  5. Jen on March 10, 2006 at 06:33

    Brad, I've got one good spot left on my BE block list and I promise, it's yours buddy. You really don't get it, do you? Then of course, I would expect nothing less from your crowd.

  6. Haddock on March 10, 2006 at 06:52

    The brave guy in Hollywood will be the one who says that this is a fabulously great country where we treat gays, blacks, and everyone else as equal. The courageous writer in Hollywood will be the one who says the oil companies do their best in a very hostile world to bring us energy cheaply and efficiently and with a minimum of corruption. The producer who really has guts will be the one who says that Wall Street, despite its flaws, has done the best job of democratizing wealth ever in the history of mankind.

    The BRAVE guy would also be a LIAR

  7. Peter Rivendell on March 10, 2006 at 09:59

    I agree with the comment above. Don`t be such a baby. When films about the Iraq situation get nominated, they`ll be plenty of comment.. just don`t expect it to be necessarily in support of the war. No one who objects to the war in Iraq for whatever reasons is disrepecting the servicemen who actually have to go and serve there, only questioning the reasons why they are there.

  8. Peter Rivendell on March 11, 2006 at 18:27

    "My support for these troops stems from the imperative to kill as many radical Islamists–who have vowed to preemptively kill us–as soon as possible."

    1/ I didn`t say I was against the war in Iraq – that is your assumption.
    2/ The above statement from you reveals how twisted your take on this war is. Ignoring the fact that Iraq had nothing to do with Al Qaeda (until the removal of Saddam Hussein allowed it to become a breeding ground for islamic extremism). Oops.
    3/ I think it is perfectly possible to object to the reasons behind a war whilst at the same time, not wishing any harm to come to those servicemen required to serve in it. In fact, if you actually gave a shit about these young men and women, you`d want them safely at home and not stuck in an impossible situation which is fast descending into civil war.

  9. Rich on March 12, 2006 at 10:45

    "Iraq had nothing to do with Al Qaeda"

    That's just bullshit and everyone knows it.

    "I think it is perfectly possible to object to the reasons behind a war whilst at the same time, not wishing any harm to come to those servicemen required to serve in it."

    There is certainly room for argument as to the what, where, how, when of best conducting these campaigns. The Bush administration has undoubtedly made a mess of a lot of it, but they've done a lot of things right as well. That's generally how war goes. It's a very blunt instrument.

    What's not arguable is the moral responsibility of rational, civilized human beings to defend and protect themselves and to preemptively kill those who have vowed to do us harm–not by direct confrontation, but by stealth.

    Wishing that no harm comes to servicemen over there is not the same as supporting them. It is impossible to support them without morally supporting their mission and the general way in which it is being conducted.

  10. Kyle Bennett on March 12, 2006 at 16:20

    to have taken such ill-thought out action without the support of the international community was a mistake which has resulted in the now highly dangerous and increasing radicalism of many muslims

    Did you ask your Mommy if you could come out and play on the internet? Grownups don't need permission to do the right thing when it needs to be done.

    The criticism that there was no international support (which is a lie anyway) is exactly identical to the criticism of doing it at all. You guys just like to pretend that you would have gone along with it if the likes of Luxembourg and Tonga had given us permission. Makes you sound reasonable, and all that (which is a lie anyway).

    I doubt the muslim extremists / insurgents / terrorists / primitive savages – whatever you want to call them – would have said "Oh, the UN said it's OK? Well, here, c'mon in, guys. Would you like some tea? A scone perhaps? Make yourselves at home."

    It`s a recipe for war, not resolution.

    That cake was already baked long before we got there. War is the resolution.

  11. Richard Nikoley on March 12, 2006 at 16:36

    "War is the resolution."

    And that is what it all boils down to. There was never a war in history that could not be effectively second-guessed and Monday-morning-quarterbacked to death, no matter how just and ultimately effective. WWII was replete with dozens of blunders, many with life-losing consequences greater than all the casualties sustained in Iraq since day one.

    I'm not trying to excuse errors and blunders. I'm just saying that it is a stark and real aspect of war, and always has been.

    What it all boils down to is that some do not believe that war was the way to deal with the problem. What then? What? Huh? Blank out, every time, because in reality, they haven't a single answer that offers the slightest tinge of a reason that it would have been more effective than what was actually done.

    What we have are people who are part of a team that's a different team than now in office, and any lie and manipulation is good enough when fighting for their team.

    Bush is very nearly as much of an asshole as some, and more than others, which is about all I can say for any of those scoundrels. But that doesn't make the war the wrong approach and doesn't make his blunders any more grave that the hundreds of wartime blunders that have come before it.

  12. Peter Rivendell on March 12, 2006 at 15:46

    Saddam Hussein was no supporter of muslim fundamentalism. He brutally suppressed those elements in Iraq in favour of his own totalitarian rule. The Taliban and Al Qaeda were not welcome there. Now they have free reign.
    There were other good reasons for wishing to deal with Saddam`s reign, but the actions of Islamic fundamentalists was not one of them and to have taken such ill-thought out action without the support of the international community was a mistake which has resulted in the now highly dangerous and increasing radicalism of many muslims, muslims not in Iraq, but living among us, as these terrorists do.
    We are now moving towards a situation where the two prevailing global religions/cultures are becoming increasingly violently intolerant of each other. It`s a recipe for war, not resolution.

  13. Robin Willcourt on November 5, 2016 at 00:44

    You are so right. It’s almost impossible to find as articulate an expression of the reality of war making decisions as you have posited. War is terrible. Yet there are times when “the cause, it is just” finally supersedes all other options. Perfect? Never! But we are witnessing an unraveling of social order both at home and abroad that REQUIRES a vigorous decisive response. I’m still waiting…

Leave a Comment

You must be logged in to post a comment.