THE LIBERTARIAN ENTERPRISE
Number 714, March 31, 2013
After sinking billions of dollars into “law-enforcement”
over the decades, what finally brought the violent crime
rate down—in double digits—was private gun ownership.
Attribute to L. Neil Smith's The Libertarian Enterprise
It takes a particular kind of individual to be an actor.
I first became aware of this phenomenon in high school, when one of the English teachers cast and directed the only play I've ever been in (although I'd already had lots of stage experience as a musician), Anastasia.
The young lady the director chose to play the lead, I regret to say, was an utter non-entity of whom none of my friends or I (outcasts ourselves in our own way) had even been aware. You might say she was an ultra-wallflower, rather like the invisible girl in that episode of Buffy the Vampire Slayer you may remember. And yet she was so utterly brilliant and appealing in the difficult role that she brought tears to everybody's eyes, and she earned a long, well-deserved standing ovation.
I have no idea what happened to her afterward.
There are exceptions, but in general, actors are people so empty, so devoid of personality, they need others to fill them up, writers to put words in their mouths, directors to tell them which piece of tape to stand on, when to move and how, specialists to dress them and apply paint to their faces, and a horde of other creatures exactly like them to inform them—through a sort of neural network like the nervous system of a jellyfish—what they should think and say on their own time.
The exceptions are figures of intelligence and character all their own, rare in the acting profession. Clint Eastwood comes to mind, as do Tom Selleck, Kurt Russell, Bruce Willis, and the late Robert Stack and John Russell. For the most part, they end up playing themselves, but nobody—except for lesser actors and critics—seems to mind. You didn't go out to see Red River or The Horse Soldiers or True Grit or The Shootist so much, as you went out to see a John Wayne movie.
Also, for the most part, these exceptional actors have tended to be conservatives and libertarians. One thing that Rush Limbaugh is right about is that "progressivism" is the path of least political resistance, the default, thought-free substitute for a legitimate ideology. If you don't have the time or energy to apply what brains you have to the political situation, or you just don't given a damn and are willing to go with whatever sounds good, it's likely you're a lefty.
It's difficult to choose which left-wing thespian has uttered the stupidest pronouncements over the years. (For the record, I don't consider Rosie O'Donnell or Roseanne Barr to be actors, just rather difficult to move and very ugly pieces of scenery, possibly from a horror movie.) Danny Glover would certainly be a major contender for the honor, as would Samuel L. Jackson, neither of whom seem to realize that nobody has been a slave in this country for a century and a half except for military conscriptees and Productive Class taxpayers. Nor has anybody kept any slaves, except, of course, for the United States government.
Maybe we should demand reparations, too.
Most recently, we have witnessed a couple of typical Hollywood philosophers applying what passes for their thought processes to the issues of the day. One of them is the beautiful Ashley Judd, an actress so excellent she was able to convince even me that she was intelligent.
Bright women probably feel the same way about John Cusack.
For a while, Ms. Judd was contemplating a run for the U.S. Senate in Kentucky until she hit a couple of snags. First, she didn't live in Kentucky, but in Tennessee. Also, she would have been running against a five-term Republican in a state so anti-Democratic it was willing to give sixty percent of the vote even to that useless bag of mucus, Mitt Romney.
The woman is a worldwide do-gooder, winning humanitarian awards for having made children with AIDS a special cause, something it's hard to find fault with. However personally, I can't help wondering where her all-consuming compassion was when the Clintons—I seem to recall they were associated with the Democratic Party in some way— killed twenty-one kids in cold blood at Mount Carmel, near Waco in 1993.
Now we learn that it has suddenly occurred to somebody (perhaps Ms. Judd, herself, although I doubt it) that, despite the mendacious maunderings of the "embedded" media, the Obama regime, with which she has taken considerable trouble to associate herself—ruling against the will of the people on items like medicine, guns, and light bulbs—is the most unpopular in American history, and that running as a "progressive" in that part of the country would be like sticking the tenderer parts of her delectable anatomy into a meatgrinder. Therefore Ashley has withdrawn, in order to spend more time with her liberal delusions.
And then there is Jim Carrey.
I admit that one of the things I enjoy most about the final Dirty Harry movie The Dead Pool—even more than the fact that the story was written by libertarians Durk Pearson and Sandy Shaw—is that in the first few minutes of the film we all get to see this idiot die horribly.
I will confess freely that despite being a fairly silly person myself, I've always detested the man and his undisciplined, infantile, self-indulgent style. The Mask was a splendid exception in which he transcended himself to near humanity. But Dumb and Dumber in which the "humor" was based entirely on urine, failed to entertain even my four-year-old daughter, and his pathological self-involvement in How the Grinch Stole Christmas completely spoiled a classic children's story.
It's said that after Mike Meyers trashed The Cat in the Hat, the author's widow declared there would be no more live-action Dr. Suess movies. Warned in advance, I never saw it. But I suspect Carrey's mistreatment of the Grinch may have had something to do with it, as well.
Carrey's latest exercise in bad taste and aggressive stupidity is a music video. "'Cold Dead Hand'," he tweets, as if it were something original, to those who are sufficiently brain-damaged to Follow him, "is abt u heartless motherf%ckers unwilling 2 bend 4 the safety of our kids."
Unwilling to bend.
For the children.
I doubt seriously that, owing to the amount of money he's raked in over the years from Obama voters, anyone in Hollywood possesses the cojones to inform this drooling moron that, after sinking billions of dollars into "law-enforcement" over the decades, what finally brought the violent crime rate down—in double digits—was private gun ownership.
Further, as a direct result of folks carrying guns with or without government permission, hundreds of thousands—if not millions—of "our kids" are alive and well today who wouldn't be if the closest thing in real life to Superman's twisted buddy Bizarro were running things.
I'm fairly certain if you used the right search engine to look up "rather see a woman raped in an alley and strangled with her own pantyhose than see her with a gun in her hand," there'd be a photo of Carrey, next to Michael Bloomberg, the Duke of New York, he's A-number one.
But I digress.
The issue of the day is what I call "sport-utility rifles" and "mob-adequate magazines" (I suggest you adopt the same terminology). I don't know whether Carrey addresses this in his video, but I do know that in urging state control and confiscation of such tools, he and his overpaid, overpublicized colleagues have become the 21st century equivalent of the criminals who herded European Jews into the cattle-cars that carried them to starvation, disease, torture, and death.
So who's really the "heartless motherf%cker", Jim?
Check out that guy in the mirror you adore so much.
Was that worth reading?