You know, between the lovably anti-American dictator and the apparently shared disdain for photographers, you have to wonder why Mr. Penn doesn’t call Pyongyang home.
-
English Books on Korea... and More!
-
Visit My Brother's Film Review Site
62 Comments
Wow, you should email that one to Bill O’Riley. You might end up with a job.
I take it that was NOT meant as a compliment?
No, it’s not. But I don’t share your disdain for Sean Penn. To me, attacking Sean Penn has a very O’Riley/Coulter ring to it. I suppose, and I say this as a fellow American, I wish people would move past the whole Hollywood-is-a-liberal-elite backlash thing.
I guess what I’m trying to project here is that I think you’re better than that.
It does seem a rather random lashing out. Definitely election season.
When I think of Sean Penn and his ilk, one thing comes to mind: “Team America.” As Quagmire would say, “Oh, yeah!”
You know, between being a silver-spoon rich-son who had daddy bail him out of serving in the military for real, and then had the brass to prance about in uniform huffing and puffing a tough guy military image, between causing castastrophic damage to his nations economy and using exaggerated rhetoric of fear to desperately marshal support from his citizens, and between running medieval dungeons wherein prisoners never see a judge or have charges brought against them….
… you have to wonder why doesn’t George W. call Pyongyang home.
Republican Marmot! Glass houses and all that…
I’d say Sean Penn is a bit more ethical than O’Riley or Ann Coulter. As far as I know, he has never made an obscene phone call to an assistant or argued on TV that Canada sent troops to Vietnam.
Speaking of glass houses….if you’re totally pissed off and want to kick some ass, just go to one of Seoul’s Red Light glass house areas and start taking pictures.
Is there some special law that says I can not take pictures on Red Light district streets? If so, then I think Korea needs to make that clear to visitors/foreigners. When’s the next “town hall” meeting?
Hugh,
Bush flew the sort of aircraft that would have been in the thick of it in the event of a war with the Soviets, at a time when that was a very real fear. Considering the type of war that likely would have turned into, it was not such a peachy job as you seem to imagine. It’s easy to forget that post 1991, and even easier for those who never knew in the first place.
And speaking of “exaggerated rhetoric of fear to desperately marshal support,” I’m glad we don’t have Britain’s ‘Global Warming Advisor’ for a president.
“And speaking of “exaggerated rhetoric of fear to desperately marshal support,” I’m glad we don’t have Britain’s ‘Global Warming Advisor’ for a president.”
You mean the one who is America’s closest ally? Anyhow, he is stepping down, not looking for support, that speech is his “I’m outta here” lap, the one about to retire politicians do when they feel like saying what they really think for once.
I don’t know if GWB’s stint in the Texas air national guard after mysteriously moving from last to first on the reserve list in the space of a week. Perhaps he shovelled poop or refilled holes. However, I do know another man without a millionaire for a father was sent to Vietnam in his place, and perhaps died, so my sneer at his cowardice stands.
“From whom much is given, much is expected”.
Unless you are born rich in Texas.
correction: “I don’t know if……of a week was peachy or not”
OK … how’s about everybody just put their guns on the table and back away … slowly.
Sorry, folks, I’ll try to keep my loathsome right-winged partisan stupidity in check next time.
Besides, Heaven knows President Bush, VP Cheney, Rummy and just about everyone else in the Bush administration don’t get lampooned by the millisecond.
Aside from being hypocritical, “right-winged partisan stupidity” is stunningly unimaginative as well.
Perhaps he could get some much needed insult assistance from some real leftists (KCNA), via the Random Insult Generator. A few gems:
Well, I wasn’t outraged by the hypocrisy so much as his use of the word “slant” to discuss comments in an Asia-themed blog. To quote angry asian man, that’s racist!
Heh.
I’ll start caring what Hollywood stars think about world affairs when I start caring what Condoleezza thinks about Hollywood films: Never.
If I were KJI, I’d have wet dreams about kidnapping Condolezza Rice and making her my personal sex slave. There’s something satisfyingly kinky in the notion about the National Security Advisor of the Most Powerful Nation of the World lovingly, tongue-caressing my Taepo-dong.
Like I said, I object to the whole Hollywood liberal argument. I think it’s a myth invented by elitists looking someone they can label as elitist, and frankly, it’s a ploy that is pretty damn dangerous when you consider what’s going on in the world right now. Hollywood is a big business, an industry, and just like Wal-mart or any corporation, and it’s mostly owned by Republicans.
Like I said I’m not a great defender of Sean Penn, but this was the second joke in a couple weeks about Penn being a fascist or communist. As a daily reader of this bog for a couple years, and…ahem…new commenter, I wanted voice my opinion.
P.S. Love the photos of the Seoul capital building
Naishi, granted Hollywood is a big business, but it’s bankable products are free agents. Anyone who has the public’s attention is certainly wooed and cultivated by opinion shapers and makers, be they individuals, NGOs or political parties. A good read about this is Double Lives: Stalin, Willi Munzenberg and the Seduction of the Intellectuals by Stephen Koch.
Bluejives, Condy Rice = vagina dentata.
Sean Penn = CWOT
It’s November 9.
I’ll give you 10,000 won if you stand up and ask that question.
Hey Robert, I realize that claims of “right-wing partisan stupidity” can be a problem for those who see it as the one true mind-set. (you guys on the right are so religious about your politics) But it is hardly a criticism that I haven’t leveled at this blog before. And after this post, you can’t tell me you haven’t been losing yourself to rhetoric as of late.
Hell, this was one step away from claiming Michael J Fox was faking his Parkinson’s Disease.
As I said, this blog is a pretty good way to get info, and there’s no law that says you have to be unbiased. But anyone who may think to follow the link would need to be aware that their patience for partisan politics may be tested.
. . . yes, spin the hypothetical situation. Someone should be working for the movie industry in Korea . . .
Speaking of movies, interview with “Host” director Bong Joon-ho in the LA Times trying to downplay how he presents the USFK in his movie:
http://www.latimes.com/enterta.....3228.story
“North Koreans still exist as villains, but evil North Korean characters have existed in our movies and television miniseries for 50 years,” he said. “In the last few years, our movies have had more good portrayals of North Koreans. But movie villains continually change.” Into U.S. soldiers defending your country against North Koreans, smooth bit of moral equivalency at work there Mr. Bong.
Hi Robert,
I wonder why you’ve never blogged about John Yoo. He’s Korean, he’s a neo-con and a member of the American Enterprise Institute, he advocates torturing enemies of the U.S. Seems like your kind of guy.
Maybe you could throw in some nice Nicholas Eberstadt stuff about how poor people aren’t really poor according to his recent studies, and maybe offer to give Irving Kristol a happy ending.
Instead of wasting your obvious intelligence on slamming irrelevant celebrities, why don’t you excercise your conscience muscle by speaking out against these bloodthirsty lunatics?
Just a suggestion.
richardson’s comment about the potential soviet threat and the grave danger young george faced got me thinking. scores of films have been made about the vietnam war and all the hell and death that those soldiers experienced. and yet those goddamn hollywood liberals haven’t made a single movie about the experiences of george w and the national guard back in texas. i mean, in between the beach volleyball games, beer-bonging, and flirting with secretaries, there was some serious and not-so-peachy worrying about a war with the soviets.
and while spending sleepless nights thinking about a hypothetical war may not on the surface seem as dangerous as dodging land mines and VC sniper fire in khe sanh, it did kill george’s margarita buzz on many a warm texas night. and the death of that buzz is something sean penn and his liberal commie bastard hollywood pals won’t ever make a movie about. because while they love to make films about my lai and american atrocities, they’re too afraid to show the true heroism of a national guardsmen lying awake at night, just thinking about what war might be like, while not feeling his well-earned buzz.
and on an unrelated note, for every potshot any of you take at sean penn and hollywood liberals, you’re required by intellectual honesty to take a potshot at hollywood (or nashville) conservatives.
because if sean penn is a douche bag for giving his opinion against the iraq war, then james woods is just as big a douche bag for giving his opinion for it. if barbara streisand is a clueless dumbass for singing against the war, then toby keith is a clueless dumbass for singing for it.
Whoa!
iheartiheartblueballs!
since when did blogging become a fair and balanced medium? so if i personally don’t like sean penn, i have to bash a conservative celebrity?
dear dailykos:
you’ve been bashing the bush administration for quite a while. in the interest of being fair and balance, i think it is now time to equally bash the democrats, not those few center-left liberals, but ones who meet your personal standards, since giving one’s opinion without a counter argument, is um, not fair.
Thank you, seoulmilk. As far as I know, I’ve never gotten on anyone’s blog and complained that it was politically biased. I assume all are. Heck, I defended Frog in a Well after one of my contributors slammed it after Pak Noja’s “glorious victory of Hizbollah partisans” post.
I’ll tell you what. Next time Dr. Eberstadt’s in town, I’ll be happy to tell him he’s a bloodthirsty lunatic for you.
Jesus, make a crass comment about Sean Penn, and everyone gets their panties in a bind. But calling John Yoo, Nick Eberstadt and Irving Kristol bloodthirsty lunatics is apparently OK.
BTW, William G, I hardly think rightists are the only ones dogmatic about their politics.
I’d say more, but I have to watch “House: Season 2″ as per Republican Party regulations…
iheartblueballs,
You exaggerate what I said in one paragraph, and speak of intellectual honesty in another. I suppose you don’t recognize the problem with that. When something gets you “thinking,” what’s the difference between that and. . . not?
The thing that pisses me off about this whole series of comments is that I AM THE RIGHT-WING HACK ON THIS BLOG. In fact I was the one who criticized FiaW.
What do I have to do to get this kind of love from the Hole’s lefty readers, say something bad about the Dixie Chicks?
Oh, I give up. Those young men in the reserves/guard should have acted differently – none of that “beer-bonging, and flirting with secretaries” – than those of the same age everywhere else, and if Hollywood doesn’t validate certain historical facts, well then I guess they just can’t be true.
John Yoo advocates torture, including the torture of children. It isn’t a secret.
http://fl1.findlaw.com/news.fi.....102mem.pdf
http://rwor.org/downloads/file.....orture.mp3
That makes him a bloodthirsty lunatic in my book.
Please do let us know when Dr. Nick will next be in town. I’ll be happy to call him a neo con madman to his face.
Sorry, I forgot to add that many American Enterprise members are signatories of the PNAC document and architects of the Iraq war, the Patriot Acts I and II, etc.
Some of them are even agitating for tactical nuclear strikes of Iran and North Korea.
I think that makes them legitimate targets for criticism.
If you’re going to go ballistic about Bush’s Vietnam era service in the Air National Guard, maybe you’d like to include this former Democratic Presidential candidate in your screed as well:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dick_Gephardt; at times prior to his two major runs at the Presidency, he was seen by many as a likely winner of the Dem nomination.
Tens of thousands of guys “avoided” service in Vietnam (if you want to call it that, I don’t) by joining the National Guard, since President Johnson decided early on to man the war effort using draftees instead of calling up the National Guard. But the Guard/Reserve still had to be manned and it was an honorable way of fulfilling one’s military commitment during the draft era; it’s just that between 1961 (Berlin crisis) and 1990, a major call-up of US Guard/Reserve forces for active service was almost unknown (in stark contrast to the WWI, WWII, Korean conflict, and early Cold War eras).
The Defense Department went to considerable lengths to avoid this happening again by reorganizing the Reserve/Guard after Vietnam, with the result that we had (and have) the extensive (and necessary) use of both Guard and Reserve forces in both Gulf Wars. For an example, see the picture currently going around the internet of the guys in Iraq holding up a hand-painted banner mocking Kerry; they are members of Minnesota National Guard.
If we’re going to have a war we shouldn’t have any “privileged classes” within the military; so I give Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld et al and the rest of the “lunatics” the credit from profiting from the earlier disastrous Vietnam experience.
You are of course free to disagree with their motives for this particular war, but it cuts both ways as far as the two major US political parties go (unless of course you choose to associate with one of the fringe US political parties, or claim to be “above” politics — but that’s not really an answer as far as I’m concerned since we have to live in the world we got).
The Dems controlled both houses of Congress and the Presidency during the first part of the Vietnam war (until they lost the latter in 1968), upon which they suddenly evidently felt “liberated” to express their true feelings about it. Now when you hear from them about Vietnam, it’s all Nixon and Kissinger, but it wasn’t the Repubs who got us mired there.
And of course here we are 56 years later still “stuck” in Korea but I don’t hear anyone on the Repub side going around crying about Truman’s decision. Get a grip.
Say what you want about Sean Penn’s politics, you gotta admit the guy’s a great actor. Jeff Spicoli is in the pantheon of all-time memorable movie characters.
As demonstrated on this blog and other places, lefties are always level-headed, fair and agnostic about politics. Suresky.
there is no disconnect of intellectual honesty richardson. you implied that the national guard assignment was “not such a peachy job as you seem to imagine.” when in fact, it was as peachy as hugh imagined, given the alternative of slogging through the jungles of nam. there was nothing peachier in fact, which is why those that were connected managed to get to the top of the list to secure that peachiness.
and yes, i fully understand that it was not only connected republicans, but connected democrats that used their connections to get out of the war. clinton, cheney, quayle, gephardt, and scores of others on both sides did everything they could to avoid the nam. the difference is, i’m not out there claiming that clinton being at oxford, a mere 1200 km from soviet nukes and the hypothetical carnage they could have wreaked on the oxford campus, was in any way comparable to actually being on the ground in southeast asia.
regarding senor penn, the entire argument trotted out by conservatives every time an actor opens his mouth about politics is that he’s using his celebrity status as a platform to give opinions about topics that he’s not qualified to talk about.
which is actually fine logic….until they say “and our next guest here on the hannity/limbaugh/oreilly/coulter show is bruce willis. bruce, tell us why you support this president and why so many of your hollywood elite pals are such america-hating commies.” it’s selective logic, applied only to those that disagree.
John Yoo advocates torture, including the torture of children. It isn’t a secret.
Michelle Magdalang Malkin, who is of Pinay heritage, believes that the internment of Japanese-Americans during WW2 was the right thing to do at that time. Based upon this premise, she argues that racial profiling and imprisonment without due process are necessary in order to wage an effective war against terror.
Condelezza Rice. Who would have imagined ten years ago that a Black woman from the Deep South would have turned out to be a Republican and an avowed neocon?
These ironic minorities hold a deep fascination for me. It is overcompensation, writ large. A black cop would often be much tougher on black criminals than a white cop, simply because the black cop constantly feels he needs to prove something to his white colleagues. Same with these minority neocons. In America, these token minority pieces serve as highly useful pawns and deflection tools for the white establishment.
I didn’t imply that, I stated it.
You misuse the word ‘fact’ twice there. Those are apparently misinformed opinions, not facts. Cold War? What Cold War? Must’ve never happened.
Funny, guess I missed The Bruce Willis, Et Al Post at the Marmots.
I’ll believe it when I see it, and that ain’t yet.
For clarity’s sake, I’m repeating what I wrote above: I’ll start caring what Hollywood stars think about world affairs when I start caring what Condoleezza thinks about Hollywood films: Never.
I didn’t use the world “liberal” before Hollywood. It was magically inferred by readers.
For the record (and balance), I equally ignore the political views of Charlton Heston, Dennis Miller, Bruce Willis, Charlie Daniels, and any other of the 1 or 2 conservative entertainers we might name.
#39 iheart…:
“….it was as peachy as hugh imagined, …given the alternative of slogging through the jungles of nam….”
I don’t understand your larger point other than maybe you think everyone who doesn’t share your political views is a cynic, a liar, and a hypocrite.
Do you think that the only qualification for higher US political office should be service in ground combat? Like in the Heinlen science fiction novels? Personally, as a former infantryman (lots of field time but no combat) I’ll admit here and now to being secretly sympathetic to that view.
I’m not openly so, because experience tells me that espousing such a sentiment brings a normal “hardball” response from lefties of “fascist”, and that’s a disagreeable thing. But then again, from what I’ve seen real internal consistency (as opposed to a “facade” of consistency) has never been a stength of the anti-Bush crowd.
I am curious though — do you guys openly state your views of the current US administration to your ROK acquaintances? Causing them to lose confidence in the levelheadedness of US President, Secy of State, Secy of Defense, etc?
If so, it might not be the best thing for the welfare of their country (at least, if you think the US should continue to be present on the ground in the ROK to help defend them against the north).
Oh, just about anyone around during George H.W. Bush’s presidency, which is when she first became a household name, as a Republican and avowed conservative.
Damn! You’ve figured out our secret. Fortunately, there’s not a damn thing you can do about it.
do you really want to compare the casualty rates for national guardsmen keeping the skies of texas clear of phantom soviet migs versus the average grunt patrolling the jungles of nam? do you really want to get into the reality and “facts” of one situation involving a hypothetical threat and the other involving a REAL war? take your best shot in describing the mental anguish and pain that involves defending abilene against imaginary commies. really, i’d like to see it.
there’s a reason they don’t give out purple hearts for imaginary wounds, and they don’t give out silver stars for hypothetical heroism. you may want to look into what those reasons are to avoid looking foolish.
you sound like hugh hewitt comparing himself to reporters on the front lines in iraq because he happens to do a radio show from new york city, which in his head is the front line in the war on terror. trust me when i say that the real front lines of the vietnam were in vietnam, and not in texas or alabama. anyone trying to conflate the two needs to talk to some vets to get a grip on actual facts as opposed to hero-worshipping fantasies.
i’ve read your comments here quite a bit richardson, and you’re generally pretty reasonable. but let me tell you in case you haven’t figured it out yet…in your zeal to pump up george w and his hypothetical heroism at the expense of actual soldiers who actually fought and died in that war, you’re stretching into territory that is indefensible.
and it would be hilarious if you weren’t so serious. but given the fact that you are, it’s just pathetically sad.
Save the exaggeration and straw man arguments for someone who doesn’t know better. If you want to try on something I actually said or implied, go for it – but don’t be an asswipe and attempt create positions for me.
Along the same lines, you can shove the self-righteous talk of soldiering; been there, done that, and don’t need any lessons from the likes of you.
I was not “pump”ing up Bush, but explaining the reality of the situation vis-à-vis a steaming pile of propagandistic bullshit, conveniently devoid of historical context. But from where the first pile came, more follows.
iheartblueballs,
Two things,
First, your Condi comment indicates that you have no idea was a neocon is. I suggest a quick Google search under ‘neoconservatism’.
Second, in your egarness to find a reason to bash Bush, you are also dissing the men and women who serve in the National Guard and Reserves. That service not a walk in the park. So far I have had one friend go to Kosovo and Iraq through the reserves and another who went to Afghanistan with the Alabama National Guard. My brother (reserves) just missed a deployment to Iraq and will probably go on this unit’s next rotation in a couple of years. I realized that the Guard has restructured over the past few decades but a little appreciation for the people who served in that part of our military is still in order.
andy,
two things,
first, i didn’t mention condi in any of my posts in this thread. re-read them. it was someone else.
second, i’m not dissing the men and women who serve in the national guard. i’m dissing one man who served (and i use that term loosely, as his service record supports) in the national guard when it was generally a means to avoid nam.
i’ve got both friends and relatives in the guard and reserves, and what i’ve stated about bush’s guard duty vis a vis vietnam service has absolutely nothing to do with them or their current situation. nothing.
i can be critical of those politicians and sons of privilege who abused the role of guard duty in the 60s and 70s while still maintaining respect for those who currently serve honorably. and anyone claiming that i can’t, can piss off.
Andy,
How can a “conservative” like yourself support a president who is suspending the Bill of Rights (the Military Commisions Act,the Patriot Acts), and has a bunch of neo con boot lickers arguing that the president has “inherent” powers? The powers of the president are clearly defined in the Constitution, there’s no inherent about it.
They (the Bush amin. and their flunkies in institutions like the American Enterprise Institute) admit that they want America to conduct a never-ending “war on terror” and establish “full spectrum dominance” over the entire world.
These people are not conservatives, they are fascists. And if you support it, or create rationales for it (like John Yoo), then what does that make you?
Dubya’s legacy: a war begun on false pretexts, the so-called “renditions” of suspects to countries for torture without due process, one of the largest deficits in history, an unprecedented executive office power grab, etc. etc. What’s not to like?
Richardson, my friend, I like your thinking. Now, when are you going to send me my Medal of Honor? Remember that time during one of my many tours in Korea when I accidentally ingested a substance, got in a taxi, but the taxi driver was a North Korean agent who was taking me as a prisoner to Pyongyang? I was stoic; I accepted my fate without complaint. Oh, yes, those who don’t understand could argue that it didn’t count because it wasn’t real, but you and I know that at the time it was plenty real and plenty scary there inside my little short-circuited head. My medal, please?
Re: #36, Paul H
I see your point that we shouldn’t selectively scorn Republicans - Bush, Cheney, Limbaugh, et al - for avoiding Vietnam, when prominent Democrats - Clinton, Gephardt - did also. You are saying we hold the GOP to a double standard on this.
But the reason I think I am justified in ‘going ballistic’ over the first three is in my first comment on this post:
” who had daddy bail him out of serving in the military for real, and then had the brass to prance about in uniform huffing and puffing a tough guy military image”.
The fact that they talk, and talk, and TALK so tough, making out like they are a GI’s best buddy, and doing everything possible to associate themselves with military valor, and tag their opponents with military cowardice (”cut and run”, etc.) , that pisses people off.
Take the example of Max Cleland - a three limb amputee from Vietnam - having to listen to Bush fly in to give a speech for his Republican opponent (who also dodged the draft) saying “Max Cleland does not have the courage to lead” and approving ads showing Clelands face beside Osama bin Laden. Or the Bush campaign against Kerry, who whatever else you want to say, well, HE WAS THERE AND NOW HAS METAL IN HIS BODY. Two undeniable facts.
I’m saying, Paul H., that if Clinton and Gephardt had strutted around presenting themselves as SuperNMilitaryMen and calling Bush Sr., say, a coward for not going into Baghdad, I would call bullshit on them too. And if Bush, Cheney and Limbaugh soft-peddled their military background and showed some humility towards the subject and veteran opponents, virtually everyone would leave them alone. It is the GOP’s hypocrisy that invites disrespect down on their heads.
iheartblueballs,
First,
Sorry about the Condi thing, comments running together.
Second,
Since things have degenerated to that point on this thread, you (opps, I mean anyone who disagrees with me) can piss off too and kiss my hairy white butt while you are at it. That being said, Bush could have avoided military service if he wanted to do so, the Guard was and is honorable service.
elvislovechild,
Actually you have know idea who or what I support, but feel free to presume. I take it from your arguement that you are a strict contructionist then.
“no idea”
Andy,
I read your posts and I know you are a republican party operative and worked for alan keyes.
What’s not to know?
A lot, actually.
But since you seem to prefer arguing with figments of your own imagination rather than actual folks, attempts at enlightenment would be casting pearls at the feet of swine.
Andy,
Are you or are you not the organizer of Korea’s branch of republicans abroad?
Were you or not a worker and organizer of alan keyes’ campaign?
Or will you respond with some more smarmy crap instead of answering the questions?
kpmsprtd,
Tell you what; wait for me to answer your straw man in one hand, and sh*t in the other. Let me know which one fills up first. Thanks.
elvislovechild,
I must hand it to you, you have some stones calling someone else’s post ’smarmy crap’ after the steamy loads you have been putting up here.
What I don’t get here is that you are now asking questions about what you have been asserting in a previous post. Now, from my position with Republicans Abroad (nice use of the word ‘operative’ btw) and my working for Alan Keyes, you may have a pretty good basic idea of what my general beliefs are. However, you cannot make any assumptions on my positions on a laundry list of issues. Yet you do, hence the ‘pearls and swine’ reference. You are arguing with your own presumptions, not what the other guys say.
One of the things that makes me the wingnut on this blog is that I sometimes enjoy going a few rounds with the local moonbats. However, since iheartblueballs seems to have moved on to greener pastures, this particular thread has nothing left of interest for me.
You can continue to enjoy having arguments with yourself.
Since that andy left me,
I’ll find a new place to dwell
down on the end of reality street
hard fact hotel….
Sorry about the Condi thing, comments running together.
It was my KJI and Condi Rice comment, wasnt it?
Damn! You’ve figured out our secret. Fortunately, there’s not a damn thing you can do about it.
Damn right. Yeah, maybe I wont be able to do anything about it, not that I want to do anything about it in the first place but I think it would make some really interesting material for a book that I may write later in life.
I look forward to that, bj.
“Kyopo angst” is one of my favorite literary genres.