Hollywood Honors Julianne Moore for Her Politics

I have never seen another industry hold as many award ceremonies to honor itself than the narcissist-class in Hollywood. Most professionals don't have the the low self-esteem required to devote so much time, effort, and money on events for the purpose of patting themselves on the back. To each their own, I guess.

Recently, Julianne Moore was honored at one such event, the "Critics Choice Television Awards," for her role in HBO's anti-Palin movie, Game Change.

Moore took home a little trophy in the "Best Actress in a Movie or Mini Series" category. Upon receiving her award, Moore stated:

“You can’t give a great performance without a great story. So I thank the Republican Party for fostering such a truly amazing American Story.”

I have some news for Ms. Moore... It wasn't a "great performance." Far from it actually. She portrayed Governor Palin's accent completely wrong (Moore sounded like she was portraying someone from Minnesota), and she didn't pick up on any character traits or mannerisms that the Governor possesses. Then there's the fact that Moore played a character in that movie who doesn't even exist. This "truly amazing American story,” is actually a truly amazing political hatchet job. But yes, by all means, Ms. Moore, thank the Republican Party for your new trinket. Especially the ones who used that "truly amazing political hatchet job" to cover their own behinds after they failed at their jobs. And the ones who stood by and watched silently as those covering their backsides, lied and maligned one of the people representing their party on a national ticket. Moore owed them a thank you.

Now that she has been given her first award for misrepresenting Governor Palin (in every aspect) to millions of Americans, she is being called "the 'get' star." From Randee Dawn at the LA Times:

[W]hen HBO, Roach and Strong approached her about playing Sarah Palin in "Game Change" — a movie based on a portion of the book of the same name by John Heilemann and Mark Halperin — the opportunity was impossible to resist. At least, in the first few seconds.

"I got a phone call saying, 'They just offered you Sarah Palin, and can you talk to Jay,' and it all happened really fast," recalls Moore, a leggy fair-skinned redhead who does not, initially, call to mind the rogue Republican 2008 vice presidential nominee. "So I kind of said yes before I really thought about it. My first thought was, 'OK!' and my second thought was, 'Oh, no! I really, really, don't know how to do this.'"

And she never figured it out... Dawn continues:

Capturing any real-life individual on film is one thing; when she's still living is yet another; when she's as polarizing as the former Alaska governor is — and you're part of the "liberal Hollywood elite" — it's on another plane altogether.

At least the writer had the decency not to insult her readers intelligence by suggesting that Moore is anything but a left-wing elitist. But Hollywood can cloud one's vision of reality, and it certainly did in this instance. Moore didn't capture anything remotely close to the real world, or a "real-life individual." The the writer states:

Moore in many ways is the polar opposite of Palin: Committed to LGBT rights...

Stop right there... No, Governor Palin doesn't support gay marriage, but she certainly supports the rights of every American. The left has trouble discerning the difference between rights and privileges though, don't they? Trust me, if Governor Palin was the "polar opposite" of someone who supports the "rights" of gay people, she wouldn't have the support she does have from the non-left-wing "LGBT community."

If anyone from the LA Times is reading this, I implore them to email me at stacy@conservatives4palin.com so I can put you in touch with some of the numerous gay Palin supporters that I know. It would probably make an interesting article.

She continues:

...getting rave reviews for edgy roles in such films as "The Kids Are All Right"and "Boogie Nights"

Okay, there she' totally right on this point. Governor Palin is the polar opposite of someone who would play a whore in a horrible movie about the porn industry. Yep.

The article continues goes on for a long time about how they got Moore to look like Governor Palin using makeup and dress. Then it goes on to discuss how excited all of the Obama fundraisers who made the film, were when Moore put on the wig and glasses. Danny “Victory Fund” Strong stated:

"Other actors are essential in the piece, but the whole film rode on her performance. If Sarah Palin didn't work in the film, the film was not going to work."

Gee, I wonder why that is? The book wasn't even about her, but the movie certainly was. And it certainly was (in the planing stages anyway) about the election in 2012.

The next part of the LA Times article is where it gets interesting. Dawn writes (emphasis):

Moore's out-of-the-park performance surprised many viewers not only because she was spot-on with her characterization but also because she tapped into the emotional well she and Roach were aiming for, creating a level of empathy for Palin that gave her a common humanity among even her detractors.

These people put together an entire movie to trash Governor Palin's character; they LIED about her having a nervous breakdown, and then claim they were actually "creating empathy" for their victim. If this movie created any empathy for Governor Palin, I would hate to see what the opinions were of the people it created it in, before they saw the movie.

This isn't the first time someone has been awarded for attacking Governor Palin, and it probably isn't the last trinket Julianne Moore will receive from her industry for doing the party's dirty work. They will continue to perpetuate their lies, while lowering their standards to honor the talentless and agenda-driven.

Behind the Smears of HBO's "Game Change"

Many months ago, HBO announced it was planning to make a movie based on the book, "Game Change" by John Heilemann and Mark Halperin. After reading John Nolte's article, which indicated that the movie would be focused primarily around Governor Palin and it wouldn't be portraying her in a very positive light, I decided to study up on it. I purchased a copy of the book, read the TWO chapters based on Governor Palin, and took down some notes.

As Nicole recently noted, HBO decided to release a trailer to that movie during this holiday week. The actual movie doesn't air until March of 2012, or as John Nolte wrote in his follow-up piece on Wednesday:

The one dynamic HBO probably didn’t count on was Palin’s decision not to run for the 2012 nomination. The film’s promotion and the cable news chatter that’s sure to follow seems timed to hit on, before, and around March 6, which is Super Tuesday.

The one line from the notes I took back in March that stood out as I was reviewing them for this piece, was:

Even though this book is supposed to be a story about 2008, it's really all about 2012.

This movie was orchestrated from start to finish as a way to damage Governor Palin during an election year by people who are not merely "artists & entertainers." Just look at the people involved in the making of the movie. First you have the director, Jay Roach who donated $2,300 to Barack Obama in 2008. Danny Strong, the person who wrote the screenplay, gave Obama $2,500 in 2008. Julianne Moore, the woman who does a poor impression of the governor, only gave $250 to Obama in '08 but shelled out $2,500 to the DNC in 2010. And then there's the film's producer, Tom Hanks, who has one of the most nauseating donation lists I have ever seen, including giving a staggering sum of $345,000 to Obama. It's safe to say that these people only donate large sums of money to causes they believe in. By looking at their donations, it's easy to see what it is that they believe in.

Danny "Obama Victory Fund" Strong, based his HBO screenplay on a book that came under significant scrutiny after it was published, even by MSM types. The thing that stood out amongst most of it's critics was the fact that Heilemann and Halperin didn't source any of the accusations they made. They claim to have interviewed over 300 people during their research, but not one of those people are named. Heilemann and Halperin do however, name the people who were present during each instance during the '08 campaign that they claim happened. I found it interesting that within the Palin chapters of the book, Nicolle Wallace, her husband Mark Wallace, Steve Schmidt, and or the mysterious "famous GOP strategist" are always present. It's no secret that Nicolle Wallace has been trashing and undermining Governor Palin since the 2008 race. Most recently, she was caught in a lie by a former senior adviser to the McCain campaign, Charlie Black. From National Review Online:

Over at the Washington Examiner, Byron York reports that Wallace is claiming, in a new Time interview, that McCain’s team considered bumping Palin from the veep slot. “There certainly were discussions — not for long because of the arc the campaign took — but certainly there were discussions about whether, if McCain were to win, it would be appropriate for her to be sworn in,” Wallace tells the magazine.

[Charlie] Black says that’s nonsense. “Nicolle, like any author, is trying to sell books. This comment to Time, like her book [It’s Classified], is a piece of fiction. There were never any such discussions. At no high level of the campaign was there ever such talk. She’s probably doing this to sell her book.”

“Look, I was with McCain 90 percent of the time. If I wasn’t around, I knew what was happening. And nothing like this happened.” Wallace, he says, “is one of the few dissidents,” one of the “disaffected” staffers who continues to criticize Palin, and “she is inaccurate in doing so.”

Steve Schmidt also has a long history of trashing Governor Palin. In a 2010 post, Dan Riehl pegged the source of Schmidt's animosity (emphasis):

The only modest bit of news in all this is that the pathetic Steve Schmidt continues to lack the class and intelligence required to simply shut up. Look at the basic facts even Schmidt is forced to confess. He would make it seem as though Palin was the absolutely worst thing about the McCain campaign, then he turns around and admits that, without her, things would have been much worse. That makes no sense.

On top of that, the fools running the campaign, including Schmidt, continued to consider Joe Lieberman for VP up until the very last minute, absolutely without realizing what a disaster that would have been. It took reactions outside the campaign to finally give them a clue how foolish they were in formulating and managing the campaign. Now suddenly, Schmidt is the all wise and wonderful know it all with the reputation, intellect and credibility to dump on Palin yet once, again? That makes no sense, either.

In continuing to not take responsibility for what a colossal failure he, as much, if not more than anyone else, was - all Schmidt has managed to accomplish with all his blathering is to put every potential national Republican candidate on notice that hiring Schmidt for perhaps anything other than coffee and sandwich fetching, would be an unmitigated disaster dooming them and their campaign to eternal hell across the Republican base.

It's clear that McCain's campaign failed on many levels. But former staffers who were responsible for that failure, used the leftist media to shift blame from themselves on to Governor Palin, and that is reprehensible. Both the left and these former staffers had a motive to run this trash against the governor. They simply made up anything they thought sounded really bad then leaked it to an eager, Obama-rooting media who was more than happy to take their word for it. So, it shouldn't surprise anyone that the Wallaces and Schmidt are consistently present during Heilemann and Halperin's tales. But what does that say about Heilemann and Halperin as journalists?

Can you really be a "respected journalist" if you never cite your sources? Sources are used so that readers can judge for themselves the credibility of each claim. Without them, "journalists" are doing nothing but repeating rumors, which usually earns one the title, "Gossip Columnist." What about bloggers? Personally, I try not to write on an important topics without listing my sources and posting links to back up claims. It's one reason that I've never wrote a piece about all of the rumors I've heard about Mark Halperin sexually harassing and making inappropriate comments to female professional acquaintances. After all, they're just rumors, right? (note: I have actually heard these rumors before, I didn't just make them up for effect)

For years now, I've held to the notion that Governor Palin's foes will do whatever it takes to destroy perceptions of her in the eyes of Americans. From ex-staffers with an axe to grind, to smear merchants like Heilemann and Halperin, to the left-wing activists who "produce" all things Hollywood, this book and the movie that followed shows how folks with an agenda can work in concert to achieve their ends. While each player may have a different overall agenda, the goal is the same. In the United States, 28.2 million households subscribe to HBO. That's a lot of people who, by and large, are not familiar with the antics of the Wallaces, Schmidt, the rumors about Mark Halperin, or how devoted Tom Hanks is to pushing liberalism with campaign contributions and through the use popular culture. A fact not unnoticed by those responsible for this production.