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.

Steve Schmidt Admits Role in HBO Smear-U-Drama

Last December I wrote about a piece titled Behind the Smears of HBO’s “Game Change.” While writing about the authors of the book that the fictional HBO smear-u-drama is based on, I noted:

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 where 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.

After reading the book, it was pretty obvious to me that the unnamed sources for the book were primarily Steve Schmidt, Nicolle, and Mark Wallace. That was verified in Saturday's edition of the Los Angeles Times when Schmidt and Wallace finally signed their names to this deal. Entertainment writer James Rainey notes:

Schmidt and a chief Palin '08 aide, Nicolle Wallace, said they found it highly credible. Wallace said the film "captured the spirit and emotion of the campaign."

Of course they did! They sold their souls and their careers to the enemy in an effort to save their sorry reputations. I am happy to see that none of the current GOP presidential candidates were dumb enough to hire any of these losers.

And now here's proof that Schmidt sold his garbage to two left-leaning book authors, in a publication that essentially glorifies Barack Obama, right after he failed in his job (emphasis):

Schmidt and most of the other top operatives from the McCain campaign gave extended interviews to John Heilemann and Mark Halperin, the book authors. Many of the same sources also spoke to Danny Strong, writer of the film, and to director Jay Roach, who also teamed on the Emmy-winning docudrama "Recount," about the razor's edge 2000 election finish. Chris Edwards, one of Palin's 2008 staffers, served as a technical advisor to the filmmakers.

I don't know who "most of the other top operatives" are supposed to be, but I assume he's talking about Nicolle and Mark Wallace, as well as Chris Edwards mentioned above. These former "consultants," (who destroyed their own careers by running a horrible campaign in 2008, losing the election to a junior Senator from Illinois) sold their version of events to writers with an agenda. They were trying to restore their own reputations by passing the blame on to Governor Palin, making up details and accounts to make her look culpable. But any honest observer could clearly see that Governor Palin was not the problem in that campaign. Under Schmidt's "expertise" the McCain campaign fumbled the economic meltdown and were absolute cowards when dealing with Obama's history and associations. And I don't need to falsify accounts of Steve Schmidt having a his own mental meltdown to prove that he was incompetent. The facts speak for themselves.

Is there any question why Governor Palin always makes it a point to encourage the current crop of GOP presidential contenders to be wary of campaign consultants?

Both the WSJ & LA Times Misquote Governor Palin from the India Today Conclave

Accuracy doesn't seem to be the media's strong suite these days. It makes you wonder if these "journalists" are incompetent, lazy, or worse; pushing an agenda. We can only speculate the reasons, but the fact is undeniable.

Take for instance, the reporting by both the Wall Street Journal and the LA Times from Governor Palin's speech and Q&A session at the India Today Conclave today. Both of them state that the governor said the following while giving an answer to a question:

“Free people that make up a free country don’t wage war on another country.”

That is a direct misquote. What Governor Palin actually said:

“Free people that make up a free country don’t wage war on another free country.”

Watch the clip of Governor Palin, from the event to see for yourself (at the 22:50 mark).

These reporters omitted a small, yet very important word from her sentence. The word "free." By doing so, they change the entire context of the point she was making. The governor's true remark was 100% accurate and history proves that to be the case. Are these press agents purposely trying to make Governor Palin look uninformed by misreporting her statement? Or are they just pathetic performers at their jobs?

Either way, let's just be happy that these "journalists" didn't decide to become brain surgeons.