George Clooney - I Am A Liberal, There I Said it

[MrsSpringsteen]

So what do you think, especially about what he says about the Democrats who voted for the war? When I saw Good Night And Good Luck it felt so relevant to today, I think it's out on DVD this week.

I can dislike being labelled a "liberal" and still stand for the things he's talking about.

huffingtonpost.com

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/george-clooney/i-am-a-liberal-there-i-_b_17119.html

I am a liberal. And I make no apologies for it. Hell, I'm proud of it.

Too many people run away from the label. They whisper it like you'd whisper "I'm a Nazi." Like it's dirty word. But turn away from saying "I'm a liberal" and it's like you're turning away from saying that blacks should be allowed to sit in the front of the bus, that women should be able to vote and get paid the same as a man, that McCarthy was wrong, that Vietnam was a mistake. And that Saddam Hussein had no ties to al-Qaeda and had nothing to do with 9/11.

This is an incredibly polarized time (wonder how that happened?). But I find that, more and more, people are trying to find things we can agree on. And, for me, one of the things we absolutely need to agree on is the idea that we're all allowed to question authority. We have to agree that it's not unpatriotic to hold our leaders accountable and to speak out.

That's one of the things that drew me to making a film about Murrow. When you hear Murrow say, "We mustn't confuse dissent with disloyalty" and "We can't defend freedom at home by deserting it at home," it's like he's commenting on today's headlines.

The fear of been criticized can be paralyzing. Just look at the way so many Democrats caved in the run up to the war. In 2003, a lot of us were saying, where is the link between Saddam and bin Laden? What does Iraq have to do with 9/11? We knew it was bullshit. Which is why it drives me crazy to hear all these Democrats saying, "We were misled." It makes me want to shout, "Fuck you, you weren't misled. You were afraid of being called unpatriotic."

Bottom line: it's not merely our right to question our government, it's our duty. Whatever the consequences. We can't demand freedom of speech then turn around and say, But please don't say bad things about us. You gotta be a grown up and take your hits.

I am a liberal. Fire away.

 

[U2democrat]

I am a liberal, there's no hiding that, and I have no shame. Clooney

 

[Golightly Grrl]

I am a liberal, there's no hiding that, and I have no shame. Clooney

I didn't think my crush on Mr. Clooney could get any deeper but it has and my admiration for his chutzpah has gone through the roof.

I'm a liberal and damn proud of it!!!!

 

[MrsSpringsteen]

Did anyone read any of the comments on the blog? Most are complimentary but here's one...

"Good Night and Good Luck is the theme of the Democratic party as it "progressively" loses support from the American electorate. Why does it continue to lose support from voters? You would think that Democrats would actually begin questioning their platforms and messages. Instead you dimwits continue alienating yourselves by pushing agendas that make no sense. You guys live in a dream world. Fueled by rage, you would sooner label American troops "torturers" than lead our country with pride. The self-loathing retreat and defeat crowd sees the world as half-empty vs. half-full, with America as the root of all that is wrong with the world.

While you make movies that push your agendas, never once admitting that there is not one, NOT ONE example of an individual that was accused by Joe McCarthy, who was not IN FACT a Soviet Spy. Read the Venona papers. Hollywoods obsession with communism, has led it to deny reality.

Yes, you are a liberal...we get it. Do you?"

 

[Irvine511]

i'm a progressive.

 

[Dismantled]

who cares what Clooney has to say.....

 

[blueyedpoet]

i'm a progressive.

See, liberalism to me means nothing. I agree with the notion of being progressive. Humans progress - it's just what we do.
I kind of get tired of Hollywood and it's "liberalism."
Now, I have no idea what Clooney does to help the world, but I have a feeling it's not that much. "I'm proud to be in Hollywood where we are out of touch," he claimed a week ago. He went on to say that it's good to be out of touch if that means giving a black actress an academy award during the 1930s, blah, blah, blah. What has Hollywood actually done to help the world? That actress played a token black character - way to go you liberal hollywood. Hollywood nominates a gay movie for best picture. "Oooh, we're so liberal; we're progressive cause we nominated a gay movie," is what is essentially said. The actual award goes to "Crash" which is another "liberal" movie right? Nevermind the fact that the movie makes racism out to be something that is experienced in broad, epic sort of way and completly ignores the notion that racism today is very dangerous because of how subtle it is. It's in our language; it's in our mannerisms. And so, people who actually are racist, watch the movie and say "hey, i don't shoot black people or call them n*gers, so I'm not racist."
Hollywood refuses to actually engage in dialogue that is truly progressive. It's a necessary illusion that Hollywood is so out of touch and liberal. It keeps liberals happy (yay! Hollywood is for us) and it keeps conservatives happy (Bill O'Reilly: Liberalism in Hollywood is out of control, they're nominating a gay movie). The acutal issues go untouched.

 

[verte76]

I'm a liberal and damn proud of it! I live in a *big time* red state, too!

 

[Headache in a Suitcase]

while anyone who really considers them to be a true liberal or true conservative worries me, i respect clooney 'cause he puts his money where his mouth is, unlike many other celebrity douchebags.

 

[BonosSaint]

I accept the label liberal. I just don't accept the label Democrat anymore. Clooney made a lot of sense.

 

[nbcrusader]

I don't accept labels.

 

[Irvine511]

I don't accept labels.

sometimes, though, society forces you to live by them and holds you accountable for them, fair or not.

just for what it's worth ...

 

[edgeboy]

Clooney knows all.

..Honestly,just cause his dad was a reporter doesn't mean he knows everything about politics.

 

[melon]

I'm tired of all this foreign policy pontification. When some self-described liberal has an idea for how to fix our domestic problems, I'll be all ears. In the meantime, I really could care less.

Melon

 

[BVS]

who cares what Clooney has to say.....

Why do we care what anyone says? Why is Clooney's position any different from anyone else?

Clooney comes off as a farely informed person. Yes there are some very uninformed celebrities that just rattle off, but they exist on both sides.

I loved what he said at the Oscars about being out of touch...

But the same goes for politicians. I never understood this whole "celebrity's opinions don't matter". Politicians didn't go to a special school that makes them politicians, I'm more educated than a lot of politicians.

If you denounce a celebrity's point of view, just on the fact that they are celebrity, then we might as well not count the majority of votes from the common man. Those votes weigh a lot heavier than Clooney's opinion.

Why do we care about those votes?

 

[angelordevil]

George is right. I mean left.

 

[Dutch Partygirl]

Clooney knows all.

..Honestly,just cause his dad was a reporter doesn't mean he knows everything about politics.

I don't think this has got anything to do with his dad. He comes across as a well informed and intelligent man who knows his stuff.

 

[MrsSpringsteen]

He comes across as a well informed and intelligent man who knows his stuff.

I think so too, of course sometimes he can come across as know-it-all, arrogant, whatever you want to call it. Many celebrities can, but there are still a few who are credible in my eyes. Of course I have no bias whatsoever to his looks and charm

I don't know though about saying that Democrats who voted for the war weren't misled, I'd like to believe there are still some politicians left who have moral courage and aren't afraid of looking unpatriotic. But maybe there aren't.

this is what Wonkette said about his article

"To everyone who’s ever felt like the review of Def Leppard’s Hysteria that they wrote for their High School Newspaper was substandard, gaze on the writing of George Clooney, and take heart."

 

[financeguy]

In 2003, a lot of us were saying, where is the link between Saddam and bin Laden? What does Iraq have to do with 9/11? We knew it was bullshit. Which is why it drives me crazy to hear all these Democrats saying, "We were misled." It makes me want to shout, "Fuck you, you weren't misled. You were afraid of being called unpatriotic."

Bottom line: it's not merely our right to question our government, it's our duty. Whatever the consequences.
.

I think it's misguided of Clooney to imply that opposition to the Iraq war, and an attitude of questioning government, are necessarily 'liberal' positions.

It just feeds into us the us vs them paradigm of the neo-'conservatives' and Bushbots.

There was a time when the Democrats were known as the War Party, oddly enough.

 

[verte76]

I don't accept labels.

I don't either, actually. When I say I'm a liberal I'm only thinking of my liberal positions and am conveniently forgetting the things I'm conservative about. It's a very incomplete self-description, which I have a weakness for. I think it's my screwy concentration.

 

[Utoo]

Walter Cronkite wrote a wonderful editorial in the Washington Post in the Fall of 2004 leading up to the Presidential elections. He encouraged Democrats to stop being afraid to be called "liberal." He inspired us to recall that over the decades, "liberal" has meant fighting for voting rights for women, fighting for equal rights for blacks, fighting for education, fighting for healthcare; fighting against an ideology that alternates between being stuck in the ways of the 1800s and stuck looking out for one's own wallet. That's a label that should be freely and eagerly accepted, not feared.

It was a beautiful editorial & I'll see if I can find it.

As for Clooney's piece above, I think it's equally brilliant. We've allowed Bush & his spinning colleagues to "dumb down" America. We've let him encourage us to see things in purely black and white; you're either with us or against us; you're either patriotic and support the President, his decisions, the war, the troops, etc., or you question things are unpatriotic. You're either "strong" in the "war" on terror, or you're "weak." It's bullshit. It really annoys the crap out of me to see people so damned afraid to speak up and question things.

A similar thing is happening with this motion for a Presidential censure over the illegal wiretapping fiasco. Feingold said today he's pushing for the censure because the way the wiretapping was done is purely illegal. He clarified today and said that the government should, in fact, wiretap suspected terrorists, etc....but the problem is in the way that it was done---they way they did it was against the law. Dick Cheney, shithead himself, comes out today and says that on this issue, you're either with the "extreme...few" (those for the censure), or you're for something "vital to the security of the nation." Once again, dumbing down an issue to either you're for security or you're against it. Bullshit.

Question things. Fight for people's rights. Fight for helping people's lives. Don't be afraid to be a good human being.

 

[Utoo]

Here's the Cronkite letter to Kerry. I believe it's the full article. Please don't let this turn into a Kerry discussion or Election 2004 discussion. I'm posting this as part of the argument that there's no reason to be afraid of being called "liberal."

"Dear Senator Kerry..."

In the interests of your campaign and your party’s desire to unseat George W. Bush, you have some explaining to do. During the primary campaign, your Democratic opponents accused you of flip-flopping on several important issues, such as your vote in favor of the Iraq War resolution.

Certainly your sensitivity to nuance, your ability to see shades of gray where George Bush sees only black and white, explains some of your difficulty. Shades of gray don’t do well in political campaigns, where primary colors are the rule. And your long and distinguished service in the Senate has no doubt led to genuine changes in some positions. But the denial that you are a liberal is almost impossible to reconcile.

When the National Journal said your Senate record makes you one of the most liberal members of the Senate, you called that “a laughable characterization” and “the most ridiculous thing I’ve ever seen in my life.” Wow! Liberals, who make up a substantial portion of the Democratic Party and a significant portion of the independent vote, are entitled to ask, “What gives?”

It isn’t just the National Journal that has branded you as a liberal. So has the liberal lobbying group Americans for Democratic Action. Senator, check your own website. It says you are for rolling back tax cuts for the wealthiest Americans, for tax credits to both save and create jobs, for real investment in our schools. You’ve voted, in the words of your own campaign, for “every major piece of civil rights legislation to come before Congress since 1985, as well as the Equal Rights Amendment.” You count yourself (and are considered by others) a leader on environmental protection issues.

You are committed to saving Medicare and Social Security, and you are an internationalist in foreign policy.

What are you ashamed of? Are you afflicted with the Dukakis syndrome -- that loss of nerve that has allowed conservatives both to define and to demonize liberalism for the past decade and more? You remember, of course, that it was during the 1988 presidential campaign that George Bush I attacked Democrat Michael Dukakis both for opposing the Vietnam War and for stating he was a card-carrying member of the American Civil Liberties Union. Both proved, Bush said, that Dukakis was a liberal. Dukakis responded to that as an attack on his patriotism. He defended neither liberalism nor the ACLU....

If 1988 taught us anything, it is that a candidate who lacks the courage of his convictions cannot hope to convince the nation that he should be given its leadership. So, senator, some detailed explanations are in order if you hope to have any chance of defeating even a wounded George II in November. You cannot let the Bush league define you or the issues. You have to do that yourself. Take my advice and lay it all out, before it’s too late.

 

[the iron horse]

I think I'm going to try walking into a pub and lighting a smoke in rememberance of Edward R. Murrow.

 

[martha]

I was getting my toenails done a few months ago and came across an interview with the lovely Mr. C in Interview magazine. It was along these same lines. He was talking about how people are ashamed to be liberals when it was the liberals who did so much to make our country a fairer place: reformed child labor laws, introduced the 40 hour work week, passed civil rights legislation, etc. He pointed out how Conservatives were against all these things and at times still are.

I'm a Liberal and proud of it.

 

[martha]

I think it's misguided of Clooney to imply that opposition to the Iraq war, and an attitude of questioning government, are necessarily 'liberal' positions.

Those are liberal positions in the US. Just ask any Republican.

 

[nbcrusader]

Those are liberal positions in the US. Just ask any Republican.

Please.

Republicans do plenty of questioning of government. Just go back one Administration.

 

[martha]

Please.

Republicans do plenty of questioning of government. Just go back one Administration.

No. Let's talk about this administration. Trotting out Clinton is an easy dodge.

Let's talk about what's going on right now.

 

[nbcrusader]

No. Let's talk about thisadministration. Trotting out Clinton is an easy dodge.

Let's talk about what's going on right now.

It is not a dodge to your blanket generalization. But, to respond to your question, look at the port deal for a starter.

And there is plenty of questioning on Iraq on both sides of the isle.

Don't confuse questioning with the volume of the question.

 

[martha]

And there is plenty of questioning on Iraq on both sides of the isle.

Oh sure, now there is. Where were all these questioners a few years ago?

Oh yeah, they were following thier president off the cliff, while people like me were accused of being unpatriotic.

 

[Angela Harlem]

See, liberalism to me means nothing. I agree with the notion of being progressive. Humans progress - it's just what we do.
I kind of get tired of Hollywood and it's "liberalism."
Now, I have no idea what Clooney does to help the world, but I have a feeling it's not that much. "I'm proud to be in Hollywood where we are out of touch," he claimed a week ago. He went on to say that it's good to be out of touch if that means giving a black actress an academy award during the 1930s, blah, blah, blah. What has Hollywood actually done to help the world? That actress played a token black character - way to go you liberal hollywood. Hollywood nominates a gay movie for best picture. "Oooh, we're so liberal; we're progressive cause we nominated a gay movie," is what is essentially said. The actual award goes to "Crash" which is another "liberal" movie right? Nevermind the fact that the movie makes racism out to be something that is experienced in broad, epic sort of way and completly ignores the notion that racism today is very dangerous because of how subtle it is. It's in our language; it's in our mannerisms. And so, people who actually are racist, watch the movie and say "hey, i don't shoot black people or call them n*gers, so I'm not racist."
Hollywood refuses to actually engage in dialogue that is truly progressive. It's a necessary illusion that Hollywood is so out of touch and liberal. It keeps liberals happy (yay! Hollywood is for us) and it keeps conservatives happy (Bill O'Reilly: Liberalism in Hollywood is out of control, they're nominating a gay movie). The acutal issues go untouched.