I love Hollywood until the actors step off the screen and open their mouths….it’s hard to stomach seeing characters you love dissolve into the acid vat of liberal rhetorics.

—Beetle Blogger

See this from Good Sense Politics:

Tom Hanks’ Bigoted Tirade Against Mormons

Any Tom Hanks fans out there? You probably didn’t know that he is Executive Producer for HBO’s hateful “Big Love,” which portrays Mormonism as a dangerous polygamist cult, confusing FLDS and LDS. Well the “nicest guy in Hollywood” went on an appalling tirade Wednesday over Proposition 8:

“The truth is this takes place in Utah [false], the truth is these people are some bizarre offshoot of the Mormon Church [false, that’s only in your bigotted show, Tom], and the truth is a lot of Mormons gave a lot of money to the church [false, zero money was given to the church over this] to make Prop-8 happen. There are a lot of people who feel that is un-American, and I am one of them. I do not like to see any discrimination codified on any piece of paper, any of the 50 states in America, but here’s what happens now. A little bit of light can be shed, and people can see who’s responsible [of course the actual voters aren’t responsible, because the vote will be overturned soon anyway], and that can motivate the next go around of our self correcting Constitution[wait, are you saying that our constitutional processes are motivated by who supported which campaigns?], and hopefully we can move forward instead of backwards. So let’s have faith in not only the American, but Californian, constitutional process[destroying the people’s vote is very constitutional].”



  1. debbie said,

    January 17, 2009 at 11:59 pm

    Can I suggest that one of the first things we do is get smart about the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution. The students of America do not know their history and instead of finding the truth for themselves they trust lawyers and actors.
    We’ve got to know our rights and that the gov’t cannot take them away. And fight when it does happen.

  2. Euripides said,

    January 18, 2009 at 1:45 am

    Debbie’s correct. We need to especially spread the “word” about the first amendment and that little pesky free exercise clause about religion. How have we come so far in our society in the degradation of religion?

  3. Liberty Belle said,

    January 18, 2009 at 1:54 am

    I really liked some of his movies, but can you watch them with the same awe and respect for his talent without those niggling comments coming into the picture? Perhaps it betrays my over-developed sense of patriotism, but I don’t think I could stomach sitting through his movies after comments like that. How awful.

  4. Delirious said,

    January 18, 2009 at 2:01 am

    Just the other day someone was talking with me about Tom Hanks, and we were talking about his movies that we like. All of that admiration that I felt at that time has just slipped away. First of all, his statements betray his ignorance about what actually happened in the election. Second of all, to target us because of media bias shows his weak mindedness. I’ve lost respect for him.

  5. debbie said,

    January 18, 2009 at 2:06 am

    I agree with Liberty Bell. How many other actors etc in Hollywood feel the same way Hanks does? That is what I find disconcerting. That and are we at the tipping point in our society. Can we bring knowledge our beginnings back to the American people. Do we really know the principles of freedom?

  6. Pearl said,

    January 18, 2009 at 3:58 am

    What gets me is that I won’t be able to watch him and take him seriously anymore. I used to think that good acting was indicative of a brilliant mind. I rescind that notion. Now I’ll always watch Tom Hanks with a desire to educate his two-year-old mind about our Constitution and what is “American.” My four-year-old knows more than Tom Hanks.

  7. teeny said,

    January 18, 2009 at 2:12 pm

    You know, I believe whole-heartedly that Tom Hanks and Brad Pitt and Oprah and Harrison Ford and Brittany Spears are all entitled to their own opinions. And since Hollywood is like a meth addiction to the press, these famous people have to deal with every moment of their lives (and every stupid thing they say) being plastered all over every newspaper, whether they like it or not. I can imagine how difficult that might be.

    It is SICKENING to me that some of the biggest names in hollywood could have so little respect for the impact of their ignorant little soundbytes. Oprah lost every single shred of class she ever might had when she openly trashed Hermes for not opening the store for her when she arrived after hours. She was ready and willing to throw every bit of immeasurable influence she has to distroy a business that didn’t fall all over themselves to cater to “her magesty.” It’s obvious they live in their own elitist reality, and consider us all to be uneducated peons that need to be told what to do and how to do it.

    Thank you, Tom Hanks, for failing see outside your little bubble and see where the *real* bigotry is coming from. Because what the Mormons need right now is MORE bad press, and targeted hate.

  8. Chairm said,

    January 19, 2009 at 3:51 pm

    What is un-American about affirming the both-sexed basis of the conjugal relationship?

    Hanks does not say.

    In his first sentence he asserted three falsehoods, as noted already.

    He tried to imitate legalese when he referred to “discrimination codified” and reduced California’s highest law to a mere “piece of paper”.

    Then he sends a message in his own code: “A little bit of light can be shed, and people can see who’s responsible and that can motivate the next go around of our self correcting Constitution …”

    I guess he means the dim light produced from the heated outcry from the anti-8ers. The protestors, and the leaders of the anti-8 campaign, have aimed their anger at fellow citizens whose financial donations (small and big) have made it on that infamous blacklist.

    I guess he does not mean the light shed by the failure of the anti-8ers to take advantage of the very large lead they had at the start of the amendment campaign. At one point they had claimed victory was inevitable at the polls. They got that lead based on two illegitimate interventions: the California Supreme Court imposed the abolishment of the man-woman criterion even though the amendment vote was pending; and the spacey AG rewrote the title of the ballot initiative to favor the NO side. Even with those advantages, which may have given the anti-8ers as much as 5-10%, their campaign lost the vote.

    Now, instead of blaming *their* loss on *their* leaders, they turn to blatant demonization of a church, individual donors, the amending process, and even the democratic process itself.

    Hanks then used more code: “hopefully we can move forward instead of backwards. So let’s have faith in not only the American, but Californian, constitutional process”.

    The affirmation of marriage is the way forward, not a step backward. The vote, like the 2000 vote on the statutory provision, is simply reinforcement of the validity of the status quo ante.

    What Hanks meant to say is that the defeat of the anti-8ers was a step backward for the SSM campaign and its courtcentric approach to amending the state constitution and the marriage law.

    That view, his hope, requires that society revert to a time prior to the special status of the social institution of marriage — prior to the dawn of civilization. He obviously favors the merger of nonmarriage with marriage and thus wants to abolish the prefential status of the core meaning of the social institution.

    Hanks spoke in more code: “So let’s have faith in not only the American, but Californian, constitutional process”.

    The constitutional process is not dependant on the tyranny of the judiciary. Quite the contrary.

    But that’s his meaning, since he just finished disparaging the state constitution as a mere “piece of paper”.

    That piece of paper, and the framework of California’s republican form of government, is not anti-American. In fact, the constitutional amending process, and the various constitutional amendments, are not unconstitutional precisely because of the written constitution — the highest law of the state of California. This is true in the sister states to which Hank referred when he dismissed their constitutions as well.

    Okay, so is it not fair to say that Hanks has put forth anti-American, not merely un-American, beliefs in which no American ought to have faith?

    Afterall, the founders knew the significance of judicial tyranny when, in writing the Declaration of Independence, they gave prominence to American complaints against the British courts. But Hanks would probably dismiss the Declaration as just another piece of paper empty of content worthy of America’s constitutional government and sense of justice.

    For Hanks, self-evident truths, are of a different kind.

  9. rubyeliot said,

    January 19, 2009 at 4:54 pm

    chairm, i’m stealing that for a post.

  10. February 24, 2009 at 4:12 pm

    […] Penn is beautiful isn’t he?  Unfortunately, as with many celebrities (Tom Hanks anyone?) the beauty doesn’t extend past skin deep.  In a moment of self aggrandizement during the […]

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: