Posted on 12/21/2004 3:18:18 PM PST by swilhelm73
An honored friend, charging that there has been anti-Semitism on the air, sends along the offending transcript, and I read through MSNBC's Scarborough Country (for Dec. 8) and found some noisy people discussing Hollywood. The question before the house: Will The Passion of the Christ win the relevant Oscar, or will it be Fahrenheit 9/11? The seven guests of Pat Buchanan, who was the mc that evening, included a rabbi (Shmuley Boteach) and the president of the Catholic League (Bill Donohue).
The Catholic League ("The Nation's Largest Catholic Civil Rights Organization") fashions itself after the Anti-Defamation League of the Jewish establishment, and although tiny by comparison with the ADL, engages in some of the same excesses. The ADL will find you a hidden anti-Semitic motive in a public recitation of “God Bless America,” and the Catholic League (what it is, essentially, is one man, its president William Donohue) will find anti-Catholicism/anti-Christianity in every third movie produced in Hollywood.
On the MSNBC show, the charge was immediately lodged that a failure by Hollywood to vote Passion ahead of Fahrenheit would constitute, pure and simple, an anti-Christian body blow. I detach from the quarrel to say that I agree that preeminence could not be given to Fahrenheit because it is a superior dramatic production — it could only mean antagonism to Passion. But to vote for a third contestant would be explainable in non-discriminatory language. Many share the opinion that Passion was unnecessarily, and inartistically, bloody.
But to return to the language of the exchange on the television program. Rabbi Boteach led off provocatively: "I hope that Michael Moore actually wins so we can finally confirm what Hollywood is. Hollywood has become an America-hating bastion that always portrays people in uniform in some sinister role."
But for Donohue, charging Hollywood with being anti-American was by no means specific enough: "Who really cares what Hollywood thinks?" The answer to that question is, roughly — everybody. It is because people care that this question was being raised on TV. “Hollywood is controlled by secular Jews who hate Christianity in general and Catholicism in particular. It’s not a secret, okay? And I’m not afraid to say it. [Donohue is not afraid to say anything.] That's why they hate this movie. It's about Jesus Christ, and it's about truth." What Hollywood likes is "anal sex. They like to see the public square without nativity scenes. I like families. I like children. They like abortions."
Donohue's swings were so wide, inevitably he touched on genuine points of controversy, the current one of which focuses on the Christianization of Christmas.
Donohue speaks of things which are "not a secret." And here is a flash point. The opposition to nativity scenes at Christmastime, or to the singing of songs that focus on the manger and the stilled star that hung over it, embraces a wide group of people. Among them are secularists who have drunk deep of ACLU doctrines over the years and have convinced themselves that any theological exercise in public circumstances is both a deprivation of their rights to seamless agnosticism, and a personal affront to believers in competing doctrines. In such language you can't say a Christian prayer without offending the Jew or the Muslim.
Those can be thought of as bureaucrats of Weights and Measures. But in this band are also genuine anti-Christians. People who wince when Christianity is deferred to, people who hate Catholicism as the axis of Christianity and who will seek any opportunity to hinder or belittle it, whether it is removing common prayer from the schools or the invocation of Christ during a Christmas — holiday (not holy day).
It is imprudent and historically ignorant for these to seek to hinder the community that wishes to express sentiments, at Christmastime, that relate to the establishment of the day.
But to suggest that Hollywood is the incubator of the anti-Christian, secularist movement is ignorant and provocative. Rabbi Boteach neatly undercut Donohue by saying simply, "I'm amazed that we've made this a discussion about secular Jews. I have got to tell you that Bill Donohue, who I otherwise love and so respect, ought to be ashamed of himself, the way he's spoken about secular Jews hating Christians. This is a bunch of crap, okay? . . . Hollywood has become a cesspit because it's secular, period." The rabbi is saying it hurts the Jewish faith equally to fight the secularist fight. And that is how to find the right perspectives in the current quarrel.
I appear to be missing your point or you are beating around the bush. What relevance do the number of blacks in Hollywood have to do with this discussion? Let's be explicit -- are you saying there are not many secular Jews in the film industry?
Second before you nit pick me read my whole post of which the point you are attacking plays a quite peripheral role.
What percentage of the 164,000 to 226,000 directly employed in the industry are Jews and what percentage are other groups ?
I don't think Hollywood is anti-American, but we all knew that the Passion wasn't going to win an Oscar... well, I KNEW. It's simple, really. The Passion goes against everything Hollywood stands for – liberalism, corruption, ungodliness, and selfishness. The Hollywood elite whose goal is to eradicate traditional values, and to devalue all that is wholesome, mainly family and religion, hates the Passion. The Hollywood moguls share the same liberal mentality that is the main cause of God's dismissal from our Schools, colleges, and courts.
Yet, not everyone subscribes to that kind of entertainment. Mel Gibson proved that there is a market for good entertainment, where God and traditional values are welcomed with open arms, and the revenue of such is many times higher than Hollywood's sexual flicks.
Great post, Victoria.
Thanks, but what do you think?
I read a great article some years ago about the entertainment industry, and the author made the point that Hollywood entertainers often have a sort of personality disorder that is rooted in their careers. Many of these people spend so much time playing roles in movies that they fear the loss of their own identity -- and they go out and adopt political causes just so that ordinary people will think they have something important to say when they AREN'T on the big screen.
I agree. Hollywood has been pushing its own inadequacies and perversions on us.
What has happened to William F Buckley, Jr over the last 10-15 years?
He sounds like a leftist neoconservative. Has he surrendered to the neocons?
Nope, same guy he always was.
"Nope, same guy he always was."
I remember him as a conservative, but you're telling me he never was a conservative but a leftist neoconservative. I'm confused now.
LOL!!!
bttt
I am curious as to how that change came about.
Clearly Hollywood in its heyday certainly extolled the virtues of America, with the likes of Frank Capra bringing us classics like It's a Wonderful Life, and Mr. Smith Goes To Washington. These movies gave America a sense of self worth, and showed us that old fashioned values were part of Hollywood's production thought process.
We also had actors like Clark Gable, and Jimmy Stewart serving their country with distinction. Ronald Reagan making films that supported the war industry, lifting moral for America.
Was it the beginning of the anti hero films in the 60's that started this trend?
I also think that if Hollywood doesn't change, they will crush under their own weight of irrelevance.
You might want to be careful what you throw around. Last the world knew, your church was filled with Michael Jackson style sickos and bishops covering for them.
Wonderful for him!
See we eeeviiiiil Joooos don't have the same issues with money that some other people do.
Or, maybe Donahue was merely referencing the New York Times -- of their more than 100 stories slandering Mel and Passion, a dozen by Rich and Waxman made quite a point of stressing that Hollywood was ruled by ethnic Jews who were planning to destroy Mel Gibson for daring to make Passion. Quite a number of them threatened Mel -- gutlessly, anonymously, off the record.
The Catholic League has maintained a catalogue of quotations for the past 2 years titled "Maligning Mel Gibson." Michael Medved has consistently stated that while Passion would cause no anti-semitism, the viciousness of these attacks, mostly with Jewish by-lines, would generate untold antipathy toward Jews. The blowback is obvious -- why do you think there have been all these cases of Christians fighting towns and parades and the ACLU to keep the symbols of Christmas in the public square this year -- why did Bill O'Reilly do "Assault Against Christmas" stories for one solid month -- why are people making such a point to loudly say "Merry Christmas"?
Dennis Prager interviewed this rabid rabbi tuesday morning -- Dennis and his producer laughed his anti-semitism claim off by naming all the Jewish heads of major studios and TV networks -- Prager felt that while Donahue wasn't exactly diplomatic, he was merely stating the obvious! A Jewish caller noted Bert Prelutsky's recent columns about how it's no longer possible for Christians to ignore the mostly Jewish named lawyers and donors in the anti-Christian ACLU. A later caller also blew the Coppola, Scorsese crappola out of the water by following the money trail -- did you know the vile Last Temptation of Christ was financed by a guy named Lew Wasserman? I didn't, but it's sad to me that people are now tracing Jewish money to almost all anti-Christian films. Dennis Prager knew all about this because he protested Last Temptation over 15 years ago.
You're repeating nonsense about that Vatican II statement -- nothing in Catholic teaching has ever allowed for anti-semitism -- it was merely a polite restatement of 2000 years of Catholic teaching that while some Jews were involved in Christ's Passion, not all Jews back then and certainly no Jews now could be held responsible. Mel Gibson made quite a point of affirming this in his Diane Sawyer interview. I hope you know that in the Passion readings at Easter, we in the congregation read the words of the crowds shouting 'crucify him' to signify that it was all our sins that nailed Christ to that cross. And, oh yeah, this nonsense about Catholics rejecting the Old Covenant -- every Catholic Mass has a series of Scripture readings which always begin with one from The Old Testament followed by responsorial psalms!
I live in a state that's 3% Catholic vs. 97% evangelical. It's pretty much impossible to avoid evangelical Christian radio around here. While I agree that they breathlessly support the state of Israel, they have no use for the likes of Boteach who offended most Christians by calling them "ignorant peasants" for not agreeing with his revisionist New Testament interpretation that no Jews were involved in the Passion -- if they call to support him, most of the time it's because he or they are bashing Catholics. I have a friend of 30 years who's Jewish -- his family came here 300 years ago -- he laughed about all these Passion related claims of past or future anti-semitism by saying the only religious bigotry he's witnessed in his lifetime have been by evangelicals against Catholics! He also said that if he ever had a problem late at night downtown, the first place he'd run for help was the 24 hour perpetual adoration chapel run by our Catholic parish!
So, I'd really appreciate it if you wouldn't be so quick to repeat exaggerated claims of evil Catholic history from secularists who want to remove Catholic morality from society or from evangelicals who incessantly slander Catholicism in their pulpits, papers, and radio stations. Always consider the source. That's why I no longer trust anyone who slandered Mel or Passion, especially the lying, viciously anti-Catholic Charles Krauthammer.
I'm unaware of any Catholic officials calling press conferences to defend child-molesting priests.
I am quite aware of Rabbi Boteach conducting a media blitz to defend Michael Jackson from his initial child molesting charges -- you know, the case he settled out of court for 20+ million. His full-blooded defense of Michael Jackson all over TV 10 years ago was my first introduction to Rabbi Boteach. Repulsive.
Why he is accepted into civilized society is beyond me, but I've noticed Dennis Prager criticizing him more and more, and Michael Medved has taken to saying things like "we used to be friends," so maybe his 15 minutes of fame is running out.
Boteach is not respected by all Jews or even most Jews. Yet you seem to think he is.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.