Homepage > Joss Whedon Off Topic > Reverse Blacklisting (sarah michelle gellar mention)
« Previous : Illyria The Goddess - Deviantart.com Artwork
     Next : Cake Delivered To Serenity Movie Set Monday 23rd 2004 »

From Newsmax.com

Reverse Blacklisting (sarah michelle gellar mention)

By James Hirsen

Wednesday 25 August 2004, by Webmaster

I’ve got a whole chapter on it in my book “Tales from the Left Coast.” It’s the concept that those in Tinseltown with conservative leanings are hesitant to express their ideas publicly because, if they do, it can be detrimental to their careers.

Now if you go out looking for a blacklist dispatch, chances are you’re not going to find one. And it’s unlikely that we’ll be seeing SAG hearings held on the subject any time soon. But I know from my research and firsthand experience, and the tons of personal communication I’ve had with those who have suffered, are afraid they may suffer, or who have suffered mistakenly, that reverse blacklisting is very real and potentially devastating.

That industry folks would contact me over the years with the proviso that I keep their names private is understandable, given the way Republicans, libertarians, patriots and people of traditional faith are treated by the Hollywood establishment. The discovery that a person has such tendencies can quickly land him or her on the Tinseltown rebuff list. There are, of course, several members of the Hollywood community who are outspoken about their beliefs and quite frankly don’t give a rip, but they’re usually the ones who have already achieved the level of success that affords them the luxury of thumbing their noses.

It just so happens that, in its September issue, Details magazine is outing Hollywood GOP sympathizers. The magazine claims that, in order to address the celebrity deficit that the GOP currently has, the Republican National Committee has unveiled a list of stars who veer toward the Republican side of the aisle.

Some of the names, like Jessica Simpson and Shannen Doherty, are already known. But others are more unexpected, like Adam Sandler and Freddie Prinze Jr., although Prinze’s wife Sarah Michelle Gellar has been known to lean right in the past.

In a related article, Sony producer Mike DeLuca has stepped up and acknowledged his Republican affiliation, describing the reaction in Hollywood as the equivalent of being “exposed as a serial killer.” DeLuca pointed out some lefty hypocrisy, saying, “They scream about the environment before they hop onto their private jets and blow 8,000 pounds of fuel getting to the Hamptons.”

One of the celebs named in the Details article has responded to the outing incident via her publicist and has done so in an entertaining and quasi-historical manner. The star is Mandy Moore, and the New York Post has reported the response as, “Mandy is not, nor has she ever been, a Republican.”

I’m half expecting to wake up tomorrow morning to a news flash that has Mandy asking the prying reporters of Details magazine this question: “Have you no decency?”

5 Forum messages

  • It never hurt James Stewart to be Republican. Or Faye Wray, Mary Martin, Ronald Reagan (Mr. Blacklist himself), Arnold Schwarzenegger, Bruce Willis, Robert Duvall, and the list does go on. The author is a whiner.
  • > Reverse Blacklisting (sarah michelle gellar mention)

    26 August 2004 16:49, by Anonymous
    There has NEVER been any evidence of Sarah even being "on the right" politically, beyond the fact that her husband is a Republican. NEWSFLASH: Not everyone votes the same way as their spouse. Sarah is in favour of gay marriage, is in favour of gun control, is in favour of a woman’s right to choose (judging from an award she presented late last year), she hosted A Christmas in Washington while the Clintons were in power, she was reading Al Gore’s book at one stage, etc, etc, etc. Now, I’m not saying that all of that is conclusive proof that she is a Democrat, but it’s far more conclusive than the proof that she is a Republican. So I wish these online articles would stop harping on about this without any proof one way or the other (something which they’ll never get since Sarah has said many times that she’s not in favour of airing her political views publicly).
  • > Reverse Blacklisting (sarah michelle gellar mention)

    26 August 2004 20:04, by Anonymous

    Once again, history becomes distorted. The "blacklisting" in Hollywood didn;t affect as many people as one would think.

    Second thing is that the McCarthy went after people in the State Department. Joe McCarthy was a Senator. HUAC (House Un-American Activities Committee) conduted the inquiries with Hollywood. Check that out. There are two bodies in the legislative branch.

    Third, the people you just mentioned about not being hurt as Republicans were already established stars by the time of their "coming out". Schwarzenegger and Reagan already had substantial careers, as well as Duvall. Face it, if up-and-comer Keira Knightley came out as a Republican, her career would suffer as a result, especially in the realm of liberal Hollywood.

    Fourth, Hollywood and California in general are so left it’s scary. They don’t just "slightly modulate" to the left, they establish a whole new channel. The only reason they have had Republican governors in the past is because the liberals in charge screwed things up so bad (Gray Davis, anyone?). But make no mistake: Hollywood is staunchly liberal.

  • > Reverse Blacklisting (sarah michelle gellar mention)

    27 August 2004 05:07, by Anonymous
    This is absolute garbage. Watch the floor of the Republicn covention to see just how rediculous it is.
  • > Reverse Blacklisting (sarah michelle gellar mention)

    28 August 2004 01:00, by 3rdStar
    Good Lord is this 100PC nonsense. There are many well known working actors who are Republicans. BTW, what angers me most is placing patriots in with only Republicans and Libertarians. In fact quite a few Libertarians would resent being herded into that corner. It reminds me of the so called patriot-act which is really a security act hiding behind the name of patriotism. Not that there is something wrong with passing a security act, but some of the measures in the act would never have gone through if opposing them didn’t paint the congressperson or senator as-unaptriotic for doing so. The sort of people who say if you don’t agree with me you are not a patriot are insidiously evil. From there it is but a short stroll to calling people subversives and traitors if they don’t agree with you. A slippery slope indeed.