Blogs and Stories
How Polanski Could Help the Right
AP Photo
Hollywood's rally around admitted rapist Roman Polanski has resurrected the limousine liberal, reminding much of middle America why they hate the left.
It figures. On the eve of the Democratic Party’s greatest triumph—when, after decades of pangs and false alarms, universal health care has finally crowned—a coterie of powerful liberals go ahead and hand a real bullet to Republicans who have otherwise been firing blanks. The limousine liberal, that Democrat who puts privilege before principle and the status in status quo, is back, with a cocktail of issues (pedophilia, Hollywood, France) so volatile that Roger Ailes could not have scripted it better himself. As the Democratic Party makes its final push for a health-care overhaul, some of its members are reminding Middle America why sometimes it’s so easy to hate the left.
For this, we can thank Roman Polanski. You could pave a boulevard in Los Angeles with the names of his apologists: Whoopi Goldberg, Harvey Weinstein, Martin Scorsese, and Woody Allen, among others. Journalists joined in—Washington Post columnist Anne Applebaum, Nation editor Katrina van den Heuvel (who backed off a bit when called on her stand by Katha Pollitt)—as did big-name authors like Salman Rushdie and Paul Auster. Even Washington advocates got into the act: “My personal thoughts are let the guy go," said Peg Yorkin, founder of the Feminist Majority Foundation. "It's bad a person was raped. But that was so many years ago. The guy has been through so much in his life. It's crazy to arrest him now.”
Like their forebears, today’s limousine liberals display a very special brand of class-conscious hypocrisy. These people would never rally around an admitted child rapist—unless that admitted child rapist made great films, won prestigious awards, and went to the same dinner parties they like to attend.
Some people have observed this outpouring and commented on the lengths people will go to apologize for great art, but what is actually on display here is the lengths people will go to in order to apologize for great artists, which is not quite the same thing.
Great art, and film especially, is accessible to everyone, whereas great artists are much scarcer. The incarceration of Roman Polanski would not stop anyone from renting his films from Netflix, but it would require that he sit out the annual festivities at Cannes. That would undoubtedly disappointment the class of people who thrive on such exclusive company. The rush of so many wealthy and powerful liberals to defend Polanski reeks therefore of self-preservation, borne from the belief that a certain amount of wealth and accomplishment should exempt them from the American penal system.
This is, of course, one of conservatives’ favorite attacks on the left’s elites. The term “limousine liberal” connotes a lefty whose wealth inures him from the consequences of the social policies he advocates—somebody who touts the benefits of public transportation, say, from the comfort of his Cadillac Escalade, or championing the virtues of public school while sending her kid to Dalton.
• Full coverage of the Polanski scandal
• Marcia Clark: The Lost Polanski Transcripts
• Thaddeus Russell: How Young Is Too Young?Though the epithet was first hurled by a Democrat at a Republican, during New York City Mayor John Lindsay’s reelection campaign in 1969, it became one of Republicans’ most damaging tools in the culture wars. In 1972, Vice President Spiro Agnew riled up the base with the phrase; Richard Nixon and Ronald Reagan ushered the Republican Party to dominance by convincing voters that the Democratic Party was run by elitist hypocrites whose wealth insulated them from practicing the values they insisted on for the rest of the American people. As a consequence, populism, which had hitherto been a phenomenon of the left, became a conservative one—the consequences of which are still on ample display on Fox News and in town halls.
Like their forebears, today’s limousine liberals display a very special brand of class-conscious hypocrisy. These people would never rally around an admitted child rapist—unless that admitted child rapist made great films, won prestigious awards, and went to the same dinner parties they like to attend.
The Right Dumps Carrie
Jacob Bernstein is a senior reporter at The Daily Beast. Previously, he was a features writer at WWD and W Magazine. He has also written for New York magazine, Paper, and The Huffington Post.
What's Joe's Problem?
Lloyd Grove is editor at large for The Daily Beast. He is also a frequent contributor to New York magazine and was a contributing editor for Condé Nast Portfolio. He wrote a gossip column for the New York Daily News from 2003 to 2006. Prior to that, he wrote the Reliable Source column for the Washington Post, where he spent 23 years covering politics, the media, and other subjects.
Geithner's Stock Plummeting
Jeff Madrick is a contributor to the New York Review of Books and a former economics columnist for the New York Times. He is editor of Challenge Magazine, visiting professor of humanities at Cooper Union, and senior fellow at the New School's Schwartz Center for Economic Policy Analysis. He is the author of Taking America, The End of Affluence (Random House) and The Case for Big Government.
Doctors in the Death Chamber?
Ben Crair is an associate editor at The Daily Beast.
Sex Advice from Cyrano
Ben Crair is an associate editor at The Daily Beast.
Mark Sanford Is a Romantic Hero
Ben Crair is an associate editor at The Daily Beast.
I beg to differ, Mr. Crair. As you apparently are not aware, liberals are a feisty bunch, and unlike the right, we think for ourselves. While some of Hollywood's best talent has chosen to rally around Mr. Polanski, you are quite mistaken that we all, or even most of us, have also done so.
How convenient that the right likes to laugh at us for never getting our act together and march in lock step, yet turn around, as you have, and lump us all in one boat. In fact, the arrogance and "special brand of class conscious hypocrisy" actually applies to the right quite nicely. As it does to the entire cast of Terrorist Fist Bump News, otherwise known as FOX. The people you describe, elitist hypocrites whose wealth has them insulated from practicing the values they insist on for the rest of the American people, applies much more to the right than to the liberal and progressive left. We don't go into people's bedrooms, we don't legislate people's speech, we don't try and tell parents how to raise their kids, who they can marry, or tell a woman her body is not hers. Those values belong squarely on the shoulders of the right wing of the Republican Party's sex addicted, adulterous legislators (also known as fornicators according to Bob McDonnell) and their fancy pageant walkers.
As for our forebears, if you want to put us into the same category as Thomas Jefferson, Benjamin Franklin, the Kennedys and other fine liberals, fine, we'll take it!!! Better to be linked to them than the likes of McCarthy, Nixon and Reagan!
Then speak out publicly. Be willing to publicly denounce statements like Ms. Goldberg's that "it wasn't rape-rape". Do you realize how many thousands of sexual assault victims would be helped by that? I have worked with sexual assault survivors for over 20 yrs. Twenty yrs. later we have made such little progress that a famous, influential woman, a member of an oppressed culture, using her public access to defend the perpetrator & minimize the crime. Women who have been sexually assaulted everywhere weep.
Roman Polanski raped a thirteen year old girl. Don't think for a minute that most of us are not absolutely disgusted. Whoopi Goldberg's statement does not reflect the consensus among liberals whatsoever.
It is easy to tell us to speak out publicly, but we don't have the same clout. I agree that the vast majority of liberals are appalled that this guy has managed to get away with rape; you have only to read the comments on this site and on Huffpo to see that. But let's face it: we are not famous. We don't have daily TV shows like Whoopi G. So it is easy for conservatives who do have their own shows, like Rush, to make it seem that all liberals support Polanski.
It is very frustrating.
I am a Liberal and I speaking out. I'm sure nobody cares but I abhor what Mr. Polansky did - not as a Liberal but as a woman, a mother and a thinking human being. What Mr. Polanski did was terrible. He ran away to escape paying for his crime (and it is a crime) and he flaunted this by living large for the past 30 years. He should be tried and go to jail if that is the verdict of the jury.
I've never held the views of movie stars in high regard anyway. And I don't know why anyone should.
I wonder what Ms.Golberg would describe as rape-rape? Since giving a child drugs doesn't seem to qualify, perhaps being beaten severely? I will pay more attention to Goldberg's commericals so I can write to the companies that use her for a spoke person. As for Polanski, you would think that a person that has suffered as he has, would be more sensitive to not harming another person. But apparently not. Frankly, I don't give a damn how talented he is. What does that have to do with it.
I'm disappointed with Whoopi for her comments especially since she has been so outspoken against violence against women in the past and was a victim of terrible abuse herself. Supporting Polanski goes against her own beliefs.
However, what she was trying to say is that it was statutory rape, and that the victim went along willingly. When the term 'child rapist' is used, most people imagine a brutal physical assault. The word I would use would be 'molester' because child abusers do trick underage girls to go along willingly.
Polanski was predatory and deserves his punishment, it will serve as an example for any other stars who think their fame will insulate them from payback.
Strike my previous comment! Having just read the rest of the comments section - I read that he sodomized his victim and that she had said no, many times.
I had read about it many times before and it was only mentioned as statutory rape. While the seduction of a 13 year old is a terrible act - it pales in comparison to what Polanski did. There is no way a 13 year old girl could consent to be sodomized. That is rape - end of story.
Statutory rape is very misleading in this case, even though that was the charge that wound up sticking, it's far too light a sentence. I hope he spends a lot of time behind bars contemplating what he did.
Have you followed the news? While right wingers are making straw man arguments, Jezebel, Salon's Broadsheet, and the Nation have all published articles slamming Polanski.
MOST people, of ALL political stripes, disagree with this minority of cinematic "ah-TEESTS". By the way, Mr. Crair neglects to note that dozens of these signatories are NOT American and are NOT Hollywood.
Whoopi Goldberg, meanwhile, has caught a lot of heat for her asinine remark.
Ok, but this article also ignores the number of "Hollywood" type who have denounced this defense of the indefensible such as Bill Mahre and Chris Rock who compared it defending OJ.
Also, when did everything in entertainment and politics be come conjoined. The democratic party is now measured by Hollywood actors? I highly doubt that Jim Webb gets up in the morning wondering what people in SoCal think of him.
You couldn't be more wrong that Jim Webb wonders what Hollywood thinks of him. He ran as a Democrat, because it benefitted him to do so. He holds a prominent position in the party now, because the Democrats are happy to have Virginia back after so many elections where they conceded the South. Jim Webb is profiled by magazines, feted by celebrities and schmoozes in the Beltway cocktail circuit. Don't think for a minute he doesn't think about this first thing in the morning when he wakes up and that it isn't the prism through which he makes all political calculations -- above the will of Virginia constituents who elect him into office. This was evidenced most recently by Democrat politicians during the townhalls.
Showing once again why Chris Rock should be president.
Good for Maher and Rock.
But, Hollywood is rightly cojoined with the Democratic Party because Democrats so frequently come begging at the Hollywood trough.
I live in one of the neighborhoods where the money parties are held and I can't tell you how many times I've been re-routed on the way home when Democratic presidents came drooling for Hollywood glamor and cash.
It appears me that you are a smug simpleton who may have a predilection toward making blanket, idiot statements.
Ben is pretty much correct,. though I disagree with his characterizations of us conservtives.
Truthfully when this news first hit, my reaction was the opposite of what you would suppose.
I've been thinking lately the far left in ontrol of the democrat prty ws creating divisions we'd never heal. That Your leders and pundits were working feverishly to destroy any chance the center right, and right had to ever trust your motives. You seemed alien beings Hell bent on destroying what works in favor of an imagined utopian vision, which only you believed in.
Then the arrest, and the immediate response, left and right was identical. Exactly the same, even NOW issued a statement I agreed with entirely about it. For the first time in years, I thought, maybe we are all good people, nd the ange had just clouded that perception. I ws glad we we in greement,.. within hours the Hollywood response overwhelmed the lefts well considered one.
And then too, I thought, maybe the left will finally agree with us, that Hollywood is amorl, and no more the friend of blue Americ, than red, because you have daughters too to protect, and the Hollywood reaction was insane.
I like Rush, listen to Beck, but we do think as individuals as well, much s the left is loathe to admit that. I don't blame blue America for Hollywood, I think Hollywood has distorted many a Blue's thinking, but I'm not outraged by the rank and file democrats, I even am married to one. Her blue dog ways might make you cry here, but I felt we had at least for a while come together in honest indignation for the injustice Polanski commited,.
Hollywood tried, but I still see that as true. I see Hollywood as the anomally, the oddball, and limosine liberal is a term I do use, but only for the uber rich lefties.
Not one for the liberal across the street, we never will vote the same,. ever,
but we each know, our kids are safe when the other is watching,.
are we so different?
So, then, where are all the Hollywood bigwigs speaking out against Polanski?
Also, when does the Right laugh at liberals for not marching in lock step? First, I've RARELY seen that done, and second, the Left marches in lock step so frequently, that it would be hard to find occasion to laugh at them for not doing so even if one were so inclined.
Also, you confuse the religious Right with the majority of conservatives who advocate FREEDOM - the ability to live our lives as we see fit with as little government interference as possible. I rarely encounter these mythical Rightists who are obsessed with what others are doing in their bedrooms (unless it's raping little girls, which apparently the Left endorses).
You DO try to legislate speech, making "hate" speech a crime. You have silenced many serious discussions with politically correct speech, which keeps people from saying anything that might offend a protected group, no matter what the truth is. You DO try to tell parents how to raise their kids, with liberal educators forcing kindergartners to start dealing with sexual orientation issues, against the will of their parents.
You DO tell a woman her body isn't hers. When the Left advocates government-run health care, which lets Rahm Emanuel's brother decide whether your quality of life is up to his standards and merits life-saving treatment or not, you have told ALL Americans their bodies and lives are not theirs.
Excellent post.
Cara on fire, go girl!
I am a proud liberal. My girlfriend lost her virginity, some 25 years ago, to a thug who drugged her. If you think the pain of this event has ever went away, you are as deluded as the people who think bullying children is a harmless right of passage. Unlike me, who lost his best friend to the effects of bullies. This man was convicted of a crime, then bolted. America does not let people who do this off, especially because they make over-rated movies.
I agree with your comments, except I think "The Piano" was not overrated. I didn't know about Polanski's past when I watched that movie, and I found it to be very real and very moving. When it comes to the greatness of art, some rather despicable people have written great songs, or painted great paintings, while some wholesome people have made crap. The opposite can be true as well.
Oh, please. Woody Allen comes to the defense of Polanski and you think liberals agree. Woody Allen, who had sex with his adopted daughter??? No one except a confused few in our society agrees with these values, right, left, middle or libertarian, for that matter. This gives ammunition to no one. Except those who want more money for police enforcement of crimes against women, and that certainly is something I fully support. Paint me liberal. And I hope that finally Polanski faces the music for his despicable illegal behavior--doping and raping a minor! One percent of the population own 95 percent of the wealth, and no one but that one percent think that's OK. The rest of us can hopefully come together on issues of decency. Hopefully we can agree that the wealthy must obey the law just like the rest of us.
Sssshhhhh!!!! Conservatives are smarting lately from losing elections and seeing their ideas discredited. This is the best shot they've had in a long time to make political hay out of an issue.
"The people you describe, elitist hypocrites whose wealth has them insulated from practicing the values they insist on for the rest of the American people, applies much more to the right than to the liberal and progressive left. We don't go into people's bedrooms, we don't legislate people's speech, we don't try and tell parents how to raise their kids, who they can marry, or tell a woman her body is not hers."
I think in today's world, the left are far more affluent than the right. The big corporations in large part give to the democrats. The democrats own and run almost all of the fringe media (NBC, ABC, CBS, etc.).
Yes the republicans have some issues with extra-marital affairs and they are usually rounded up and heartily tossed from their chairmanships or office or whatever by their own.
On the other hand the democrats have more criminals in office and holding chairmanships that the democrats refuse to look at or remove these individuals from their posts. Apparently the rules don't apply to them, because they are the true limousine liberals. Take Rangel, Dodd, even Pelosi herself, being such a huge union person working for the "little" people yet she's a multi-millionaire employing non-union workers in her vineyards. Where's the love Nancy? Rangel should have been removed from his post and office years ago, yet Nancy Pelosi refuses to remove him, why you ask? Because the democratic party as a whole is a criminal organization.
What about the "silky pony" John Edwards, scum bag of the century. Where are the democrats calling out his bad behavior. The National Enquirer had to break that story and you all called them liars. Who's the liar now Democrats.
So next time you want to throw republicans or make assertions that Fox News only presents one side why don't you look at your own alphabet networks for the same sins, that somehow are all excused. Why is that?
You lefty morons are not "special" or .... maybe you are and we need to protect you by enslaving you to the Government tit because you guys can't handle it out there in the big wide world all by yourselves like we can.
You're pathetic.
Troll troll troll your boat, gently down the stream...
You are totally insane.
byersl, modern "Liberals" have very, very little in common with Jefferson, Franklin, or Jack Kennedy. Don't flatter yourself.
I'm sure Ben Franklin & Thomas Jefferson would find it amusing to be thought of as liberals...just as it's hard to believe John Kennedy would today support liberal thought on gay marriage.
But more to the point, it's nice to see liberal Hollywood elitists & David Letterman and others who found it so easy to hurl insults at Sarah Palin, be associated with the swine Polanski. The true colors are now evident to all. But then, the hate for her is that she actually has lived a positive, successful life and opposes abortion.
I'd much rather stand with Palin than Polanski or Letterman or Clinton any day.
I agree. This article is most disappointing. Making bad decisions is not a partisan issue. Polanski needs to pay for his crime.
You're missing the whole point of the article. It's not that Republicans expect that Democrats agree on everything, but that Republicans can use this issue as a rallying cause. Republicans can appeal to conservatives and right-leaning moderates with opinions like "I can't believe what those crazy Hollywood liberals are saying."
I'm not so sure it's the "liberals" who are the biggest and most vocal Polanski apologists. Hate to sound cynical - well, maybe I don't - but it seems to me that the Hollywood types who've spoken out are looking for their next film project. So we're hearing from a lot of despicably self-interested people who think Polanski will beat the rap and work with them on a future project out of gratitutde. The rest of Hollywood no doubt does deplore Polanski's child molesting ways.
But don't you wonder why have we not seen a petition publicly announced among the Hollywood players pledging to boycott Polanski and all his sycophant apologists? Why are the only actors and directors who've gone public the ones who've backed Polanski?
Anyone here want to announce that boycott petition and give up the Netflix?
And for Peggy Yorkin of NOW to ask that Polanski get a pass...disgusting. This is the kind of thing that makes NOW look like a toothless dishrag.
In any case, I think Ben has a good point - the right wing most certainly will jump on this, having largely done a belly flop with the rest of the drivel about Obama's birth certficate, etc.
Nice article Ben.
Ben Crair,
Great piece! I would add that the risk here is not only what you call "limosine liberals", sadly there are a great many people on all corners of the politcal spectrum who think that this issue should be "left alone" for reasons that he suffered a lot in this life already, that it was a long time ago, and that the victim wants this to end. Most rapists suffered in their lives--they were usually raped as well. The time frame issue is a non-issue because the law decides how long is "too long"; and the statute of limitations has not run out. That the victim wants an end to this saga is totally understandable. But a crime was committed and she does have an obligation to let justice be served. Also, I would wonder to what degree money has been used to avoid criminal proceedings.
On the other side of this issue, there are people who think Polanski should face charges because his victim was a child. To me, this is a horrifying thought to think that somehow that "suitable victims" worth fighting for legal rights must somehow be underage. Rape is rape--be the victim a man, woman or child. "No" means just that: NO! I am saddened to see that a man who is actually guilty of this crime receives so much support while not so long ago, an innocent man who was clearly extorted, the justice system abused, and false accusations constructed by two different families resulted in absolutely no support, a media blackout, and this man's life destroyed. And yes, I am talking about Michael Jackson.
Disfacia brings up the issue of the what is the legal affect of having a victim forgive a wrongdoer. I think that the woman's forgiveness is strongly influencing the "limousine liberals." She wants the case to go away, so why should others not join her?
But personally, I think it is irrelevant. As a Christian, I believe that we should always forgive our enemies. But even when forgiven by the victim, a wrongdoer still must be held accountable by the law for his crimes. Further, Polanski fled from the law. That is a crime itself for which he must be held to account.
Finally, I object to calling "limousine liberals" hypocrites. Actually they are people who are working against their own self interests for the good of society. They should be against any social program that costs money. Why do they need Social Security or Medicare?
Do you think that child molester's who were molested did not live 'rough' lives? We still put them in jail. Do you think that kids who are raised in housing projects had easy lives that should get them out of prison. Let's face it, he is a Jew with the holocaust to pull heart-strings. No one gives the same break to Palestinians raised in the Jewish run holocaust. Guess they don't make movies that all these Hollywood types want to be in? Too bad. I am a liberal, and I am sickened by this. This is a class war we are experiencing in this country. People need to wake up to the fact that this countries worship of wealth and fame is the death of ethics on the left.
"Palestinians raised in the Jewish run holocaust"????
From 1967 to the Oslo accords that put the West Bank under Palestinian authority the West Bank had one of the fastest growing economies in the world. Palestinian population also increased dramatically, with the Israeli occupation authorities starting hospitals. They also fostered the creation of six universities.
You have no perspective or historical knowledge. At Babi Yar, the Nazis machine gunned over 30,000 Jews in two days. At Auschwitz, the Nazis averaged murdering over 8000 people a day.
During the recent incursion into Gaza, there were about 1000 Palestinians killed. Obviously some were Hamas fighters. If the Israelis were trying to kill civilians they must have terrible aim.
It's quite obvious that if the Jews were trying to perpetrate a holocaust (the word, btw, means "completely burned up") or genocide, they're doing a terrible job at it. There are millions more Palestinians in Gaza, the West Bank and Israel proper than there were in 1948.
As far as you, Mr. Ridgway, is concerned, Polanski's supporters are stressing his stature as a filmmaker far more than his family's troubles. Yes, Polanski is a Jew with family ties to the Holocaust. He's also a criminal and you're a Jew hater.
Stop devaluing language by accusing Jews of genocide with regard to the Palestinians. Real genocides involve killing thousands of people every day. I hate doing this kind of calculus, but you can check the numbers. Over the course of the Final Solution, the Germans killed about 3000-4000 Jews a day. In Cambodia, the communists killed over 1000 people a day. In Rwanda, the Hutus killed almost 10,000 Tutsis a day, making it perhaps the most gruesome modern genocide.
So if the Jews are perpetrating some kind of holocaust on the Palestinians, they are certainly not succeeding.
"Let's face it, he is a Jew with the holocaust to pull heart-strings".
Sorry to interrupt your anti-semetic rant, but Polanski's mother was a Catholic and he was brought up as a Catholic, a very religous Catholic. That makes him a Catholic criminal, not the Jewish criminal you would love him to be.
I marvel at the lack of self awareness and inability to see the hypocrisy in their beliefs. "It wasn't rape-rape" You are right Whoopie, it was simply rape.
To repeat a comment by Mark Steyn, it was more like rape-rape-rape-rape.
This user is no longer registered.
Yes, because rape of a minor and drug addiction are so very much the same. Limbaugh abuses only himself and runs off a wife in the process,, Polanski RAPES a 13 yr old girl. One is an addiction issue, the other is an act of violence against a minor.
I'm not sure that being addicted to painkillers is all that immoral, but I do know raping a kid is and helping and advocating that a rapist escape justice is. There is NO equivalency on that issue.
Actually, IIRC, the charge was statutory rape, which is not forced sex. The girl was 13 but didn't look it and her mother was the one who brought the girl to the party to trigger exactly what had transpired. Many of us felt, at the time, that Polanski was railroaded by an over zealous LA prosecutor.
Polanski did admit to having sex with a minor, it was blown out of proportion as he had no idea that she was a minor at the time. This was a fact admitted by all three parties (mother, daughter, polanski). To call Polanski a rapist is vastly overstating the circumstances.
You confirm the idiocy of the left with this very post. So taking drugs is on the level of anally raping of a 13 year old girl?
I say let Hollywood talk and talk and talk. They've made themselves the forefront of the Democrat party with their idiotic "Obama Obama" videos. The mental midgets may be talented on-screen, but those of us who reside in the real world, don't take our cues from those who live in make-believe. Perhaps some of the people sitting on the fence will finally take a stand and see these disgusting hedonists for who they are.
congratulations on publishing this column in DB -- it's refreshing to see this level of honesty here. I disagree with the hyperbolic "conservative talk-show hosts have been reduced to making up issues out of whole cloth . . . , " but hope that all Americans, indeed any person, can maintain a moral compass and agree that rape and child-rape are violent, heinous crimes that should be prosecuted.
It's self-preservation. They want their President Dream Date Ken Doll to WIN, and his image is tarnished by the comany he keeps. This makes him look out of touch, insensitive, amoral and snobbish, because he hangs out regularly with Hollyweird. President Obama appeared on Letterman's show, a partisan hack who lambasts the right for doing things far less serious than harrassing and screwing your staff. Remember that ridiculous video of these reprobates promising to change their lives for the better because the President "inspired" them -- FINALLY -- and could no longer be an excuse for their degenerate behavior? That's why this Sistah Souljah movement all of a sudden.
yup
Hollywood wants Obama to win so they do so by supporting a child rapist? Because Obama supports child rapists? Get a brain.
This is an article that hits home on so many levels that it physically hurts. I expected men to collude with polanski, but somehow once again the women who are defending him have disappointed me bitterly. Aside from the facts of the case, (as in he pled guilty to having sex with a 13yo, & that she was under the influence), & the forensic facts that proved that she had been sodemized, Polanski fled the country before sentencing! What if OJ had done that? or Kobe Bryant or Mike Tyson? And none of these guys have admitted guilt. Rapist rarely do, it is always "consensual". the support of prominent liberals supporting Polanski concerning this issue makes me sick,& angry. they should all go spend a week volunteering at a facility for victims of violent crimes against women & children.p.s. polanski's horrible history does not let him off the hook. Should make him more sensitive to the suffering of others.
Middle America looks at Whoopi Goldberg and her "not rape rape " comment and say WTF?
We non-celebrity Americans look at Whoopi and think, "She's a bigger asshat than I thought," and we watch her pathetic attempts to swim her way back into our hearts.
As for the decrepit Woody Allen... creepy, creepy!
Of course, he always LOOKED the part of a sex pervert.
very true, and being from middle america myself (or any part of non-L.A. America), I think it's abhorrent as well. Making a blanket statement by associating it with liberals is just ridiculous and disgusting. This isn't a political issue, it's a rape issue. Why must everything be politicized? I finally think I may be entirely over this website. Ugh.
That was certainly everyone I know's reaction---all this armchair analysis of it being a liberal or not liberal issue and how to use this for political benefit to your party is nonsense.
The bottom line of it all is wtf?
(I did happen to notice however, "lets be reminded to hate" as a political calling...a bit telling, in the author's introduction)
I am a liberal and I say its not "rape-rape" either, I call it Pedophille Rape.
The fact that he suffered is true; however, Most victims, including rape victims want the perpetrator caught so it does not happen to anyone else. They will go to court and be humiliated if they have to, to keep it from happening to someone else. Isn't that what most people say, "never again'?
That he suffered, to me, is all the more reason he should know better. (Not that you need to be told not to rape a kid)
Let's rehash a 30-year old case and try to make political hay. Let's pretend that there is a left-right divide on some superannuated California criminal case, and further stipulate that Limbaugh is relevant as anything but a leftover 90's phenom. Those feminazis are persecuting a creative entrepreneur..no, wait, he's evil...whatever. Whoopi Goldberg--has she ever been in a good movie?
Why should we listen to any of these people? In fact, we don't, but commentators like to pretend that we do, and they like to pretend that we pay attention to commentators. In fact, it's not up to the commenters or to us, but to the legal system.
Polanski is a confessed child rapist and sodomizer.
He is a convicted felon and a fugitive.
He deserves to spend the rest of his pathetic life in prison.
PERIOD.
And if you disagree with any of that, you're almost as bad as Polanski.
Hey, let's not destroy the good name of sodomy, here... it includes head, remember. The problem is that this was not consensual sex.
Polanski performed ANAL sex on his 13-year old victim, that's why they called it SODOMY. He raped her anally, vaginally, AND orally. MULTIPLE acts of rape one one 13-year old kid.
Well, and then there's them. Is the cycle of pious hectoring, caught-in-the-act, and terrified self-disavowal really all that more palatable? Polanski, if nothing else, has always been very up front about what a creep he is.
No he hasn't. Polanski has continuously refused to accept responsibility for any of his deeds. Even when interviewed he makes excuses. He is further surrounded by friends and family who make excuses for him and allow him to live a delusional existence whereby rules of society don't apply to him.
Yes, of course, that wasn't quite what I... Oh, never mind.
Far be it for me to explain what Matthew was trying to say, but given the subjects of his "brilliant" movies Rosemary's Baby - rape by the devil, Chinatown - incestial rape, Repulsion - rape by something in the room, his interview with Martin Amis where he said, out loud, "judges want to fuck young girls, the jury wants to fuck young girls, everybody wants to fuck young girls", his "affair" with fifteen year old Nastassja Kinski, the whining in his book about "I risked my reputation and livlihood for lovemaking" seems pretty up front about his own creephood to me. He drugged, raped and sodomized a child - he should be hung drawn and quartered, but then I'm a liberal, what do I know?
So, by your sick logic, because he admits he's a creep means it's OK.
Not to me!
Polanski belongs in prison.
And if he doesn't want to go to an American penitentiary, he's free to hang himself in his Swiss jail cell.
Nice try at lumping all liberals with a TINY fraction of Hollywood insiders and Polanski apologist. The VAST majority of liberals do NOT believe in excuses for child rape of any sort. Even Bill Maher who is permissive of almost ANY thing and has frequently been accused of sexism (wrongly in my view) thinks Polanski is scum and has said so. Chris Rock compared Polanski apologists to O.J. supporters.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bMG2ON092GM
The most linked article regarding Polanski has come from the liberal site Salon.com titled: Reminder: Roman Polanski raped a child. Which was pigged-backed by Newsweek to consolidate the MANY voices DENOUNCING Polanski: Roman Polanski raped a child-a primer. Not to mention the LONG list of articles from the Huffington Post trashing the Polanski apologist!
P.S. Since when is the Washington Post a LIBERAL newspaper?
http://blog.newsweek.com/blogs/thehumancondition/archive/2009/09/29/roma n-polanski-raped-a-child-a-primer.aspx
Good points - where is the bleating about "the liberal media" on this one.
Actually, the idiot apologists from Hollywood have done a better job of defining themselves than a thousand slobbering talking heads could ever do. Those of us who never partake of Limbaugh and his ilk have nonetheless gotten a fairly clear picture of the values these people have without having it explained or filtered by the punditocracy. Forget the commentary. Just read the transcript and the quotes of his Hollywood apologists.
Maybe its just political chicanery that many see as driving the "faux" revulsion that is being reported. And maybe it is the revulsion that those of us who have had thirteen year old daughters cannot avoid. I can say with absolute certainty that had it been my daughter I would be the one in prison -- and Mr. Polansky would be hobbling about without the apparatus he so crudely forced on his victim.
Hmm...this article sounds like more of the same "making up issues out of whole cloth."
Hope you didn't pay much for this article, Tina Brown.
Let the law take care of it. We have a legal system, as does Switzerland. If he gets extradited, if he gets tried, the legal system will work. It's not completely black and white. People who express opinions do not necessarily represent the entire group to which they belong. Harvey Weintsein, Woody Allen and Oprah do not represent Hollywood, any more than Rush represents drug-addicted, sexual tourist douchebags. Three or four loudmouth, shoot-from-the-hip liberals say something stupid about a complex case involving their friend, and people who have blogs to keep up or a 24 hour cycle to serve say it's trouble for the left. Give me a break, and keep your focus on what affects the whole country. We are trying to fix the world, and you want to mire us in trivia.
Oh good, you're trying to fix the world. What happy news, excuse us for intruding, and in fact now I recall the exaltant "I'm Going to Change the World!" pledge from BO.
Double creepy.
So, forcible sodomy (without lubricant) of a child is "trivia" to you?
PATHETIC!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Abuse and the knee-jerk defense of abuse when a woman or child is involved isn't a trivial issue - it spawns & supports violence, poverty, and robs society of the vitality, creativity & stability of affected individuals.
People like Whoopi who are defending 'one of their own' at the expense of social health are showing us exactly how far we have to go.
In a big way I'm really glad this is coming up again. Maybe we're ready to learn some more.
This user is no longer registered.
"No wonder Polanski fled. Anyone in their right mind would."
And anyone fleeing punishment after admitting to raping a child would have been captured and put in prison, too, famous or not. If he wants to make legal objections and appeals, he can do it from his prison cell, just like all the people who don't make movies would have to do, too.
Not all child rapists have the luxury of hiding in France, you know. Just because Polanski did doesn't make any of his actions right.
I feel compelled to applaud any reasonable response to the Polanski mess. "Liberals" are consistently demonstrating their generosity of spirit by jumping on this lynch mob band wagon and ignoring any relevant information except "child." "Child." "Child." Saving the children is the mantra of every repressive wave, because it effectively erases reasoned discourse. I am not a Hollywood person; I live in the Bible Belt and see the mentality in action every day. You who have decided to side with this mentality on this particular issue are putting a nasty dent in your karma.
Well, I DO side with the "mentality" that degenerates who forcibly sodomize children belong in prison.
And I am disgusted by those who don't.
You cannot be serious..
It's not "generosity of spirit" it's a basic human need to shelter and protect the young, a finely tuned instinct any parent knows very well. It's a natural reaction to be repulsed by a child abuser, rapist, exploiter, I live in the Bible belt too and it cuts across political lines, we conservatives in perfect agreement with liberals on this.
You mutter child child child child as if you were jealous of the urgent need we feel to shield them.
When you have been to childs funeral, or known a raped child, .
The only question is, why are you so concerned about Polanski's life, when he was merely arrested, not beaten, not hanged, not put on a rack, arrested to meet his day of due process,
to call that a "lynch mob" is to deal in hysteria.
and forget the mere side isssue, that Polanski raped a child, for nothing more than he couldn't accept he had no right to penetrate whomever he wished, no matter how much they cried and begged him not too.
wrap your mind around that, then tell me, again about lynch mobs..
why, do you have sympathy, for him?
Polanski would never have had to worry about the California judicial system IF HE HAD NOT CHOSEN TO BECOME A RAPIST AND A FORCIBLE SODOMIZER!!!!
He made his bed - let the son of a bitch lie in it!!!!!!!
What is the difference between 30 years and 1 hour when a 13-year-old CHILD is given alcohol, drugs AND then raped? None. It was a horrible crime perpetrated against a child. Said child has grown up and moved on, but Polanski has not paid for his crime. I don't care what kind of life he has led. He did a crime and he must be judged. I can't believe that some of Hollywood's heavy hitters are coming out in his defense! Well, the only one I can believe is Woody Allen, but the rest??? Not good. Signing off...pissed off liberal!
Are you really calling Whoopi Goldberg a "heavy hitter?"
She is on DAILY on NATIONAL t.v. and everything said on the show is distributed to web blogs, news channels and newspaper. She might not be a "big name" anymore but she has POWER that you and I lack.
I'm a liberal. Throw his butt in Maximum security and let him know how it feels. Don't pretend that liberals are okay with crimes against children.
The few Hollywood idiots that are defending this guy do not represent the liberals, just like I hope to god Glen Beck and Pig Limbaugh don't represent the intelligent, fiscal conservatives of the respectable right.
I'm a conservative. Good comment :)
Thank you. thank you, thank you.
I don't know how or why Lala-land seems to have so much clout. Media access?
Booty secks? Gross.
"Limousine Liberals" have taken our country!
Well I guess the LL's have convinced your country that you conservatives are out of touch (see the misdirected tea-baggers).
What do you call a conservative that points the finger at liberals for wrongdoing yet is silent on rightwing screwups ?
i.e. Acorn / Halliburton.
"Obama is an enemy of humanity" / "die quickly"
Impeaching Clinton / the Appalachian Trail Gov.
I believe conservatives believe they "are America" and the POTUS is not. go figure.
Hey, about your comment.
I see you obey the liberal credo, "Stop Making Sense!"
That's a "Liberal Credo"? I thought it was a David Byrne lyric.
But what does any of that have to do with the rich Hollywood plutocrats rallying to the defense of a confessed child molester?
"The term "limousine liberal" connotes a lefty whose wealth inures him from the consequences of the social policies he advocates-somebody who touts the benefits of public transportation, say, from the comfort of his Cadillac Escalade, or championing the virtues of public school while sending her kid to Dalton."
And the problem with this is what? So in America, if you send your kids to private school because you can afford to, you're not allowed to also champion improvement of public school education?
If you're driven to work in a limousine, does that mean that you should not give a damn about the condition of public transportation that so many down the ladder rely upon?
It looks like the author thinks the only honoralbe position, if you have a kid in private school or are driven in a limo, is "to hell with everybody who can't afford what I have." What a bunch of crap.
Right on.
You're missing the point. Limousine Liberal generally means "hypocrite". Specifically, a person who uses their status and/or wealth to advocate a position that they themselves don't live up to.
Like a man who advocates energy conservation to the point that it would pain most Americans, yet lives in a home that consumes enough of it to power a small town.
Like a feminist who chastises a woman politician to "stay home and raise her kids" because she doesn't agree with her politics.
Like a political party that pushes for a sweeping, massive piece of legislation and makes themselves exempt from it.
Like an Evangelical preacher who proselytizes chastity and commitment while sleeping with whores.
And in this case, like a movie producer who claims that "Hollywood has the best moral compass", after creating a petition to exonerate a child-rapist.
In America, hypocrisy is the one unpardonable sin.
Actually, NOBODY should have limousines or send their kids to private schools - we should have economic equality for all!
And if you want to put a label on my ideas, call me a "subway station communist"!
Communism is not something we need here.
You are a scary man Mr. Crair. i would have expected this from Nicole Wallace. You two dating?
What exactly in this article did you find so scary? lol
Isn't it hilarious and grotesque watching lefties defend a child rapist? A child rapist. Think about that. We already know they're soft on terrorists, soft on illegals, soft on drug use (hello, Hollywood?) and now we can watch them preening about how it's unfair it is towards Roman Polanski (who's movies I do like) an anal raper of young girls. They stand for nothing except instant self-gratification like a bunch of children.
Making something out of NOTHING. The VAST majority of Liberals think this guy should be in jail. A tiny group of Hollywood and media moguls are the only ones supporting him-people that can fit in an average small-family house.
Just like making a big deal out of the President leaving the country for 18 HOURS to support OUR COUNTRY'S bid for the Olympics.
It takes so little to scare you, Madam.
Bad news for those in your immediate vicinity, but look at it this way.
Your Limo Lib credentials are very much intact.
So, you find the idea of sexual predators being set to jail "scary" - I wonder why? Do YOU have some skeletons in your closet?
Since the VAST majority of liberals want to see this guy go to jail, Barb's point is that this article is B.S.
Barb, may I suggest cutting back on the kool-aid! its hard sugar-coating sodomizing and drugging a 13 year old kid.
Side comment: Yes, Polanski has made some good films. Perhaps one or two great films. But just for fun, without consulting your search engine, name 5 or even 3 really important films he has made. Bet you can't.
Agreed.
Bet I can: Chinatown, Rosemary's Baby, and The Pianist are all terrific films. And yet I still think their director belongs in jail--just as I can still appreciate the beauty of a Degas painting even though I find his anti-Semitism appalling.
This article is such elitist crap. It gets tiring when writers get into the habit of believing Americans can't think for themselves. Polanski's rape of a young girl is not a left or right issue, rather an issue of simple morality. Though people in middle America may think differently than east coast/west coast, doesn't mean we don't share common human values.
The political problem is that Hollywood represents the left and it can be the left's albitrose while the right has those pesky "birthers".
I have heard so many different versions to the story I have no clue what to believe anymore in the Polanski case. If it was forced...it was rape regardless and he should be prosecuted! But, I still don't understand why the girls mother allowed her 13 year old daughter to be alone with a notorious womanizer like Polanski. She would have had some kind of a chaperon if she had been my daughter. It wouldn't be the first time an ambitious DA wanted to get ahead on the back of a celebrity either by blowing it into something it wasn't! But, unfortunately enough for the right in some of our minds. That doesn't improve their lot in the slightest. A lot of us who used to hate liberals have found a safe haven with them from the hate mongers that invaded the GOP. Ted Kennedy began looking like a true patriot instead of what the right tried to portray him as. You know an idea is in deep trouble with that starts happening with to many people. We no longer see liberals as an evil thing that has been replaced with the GOP.
Good point. I sometimes think I would naturally have become a Republican by now had the party remained as it was under Ike. The inexorable consequences of embracing the dark side and the dumb side made this forever impossible.
Why did you need a "safe haven"?
Please read the entire life story of Ted Kennedy before you make another rash statement.
Anyone who thinks Polanski should get away with this should read this 13 year old girl's grand jury testimony. He is disgusting. There is no way she could have consented to this -- and in fact, did not. He did what he wanted to do -- raped and sodomized a child. Did you see her picture? She looked even younger than thirteen. I am aghast that anyone could stand up for him or plead his case. As the child of a holocaust survivor, I can say his background and experiences do not excuse him. As the saying goes, eight million stories in the naked city. There are plenty of people who have been through unspeakable difficulty and suffering in their lives and they do not rape, rob or kill. They live decent lives. He has lived a life of privilege for 40 years. It's time to pay up for what he did. Of couse the victim wants to forgive him -- she has a family of her own now -- do you really think she wants all this rehashed again -- or wants her kids to hear it. Again, that does not excuse him from receiving a just penalty.
I don't care what party or people are standing up for him -- it is wrong. I am also in the arts and I do not stand with him.
You're still making excuses for Polanski.
He chose to drug, sodomize and rape a child - it was 100% his fault, because he made a conscious decision to become a child rapist!
good grief, tumbleweed, you're deep in denial or something. It doesn't matter WHAT the mother did or didn't do -- Polanski chose to rape the child, Polanski broke the law. Ted Kennedy was a serial misongynist, at best, and was responsible for the death of a young woman. WHY o why are you defending these people?
And, predictably, just like the sun rises and sets, you cast aspersions on the "GOP" bogey-man, in an attempt to deflect attention from two prominent, law-breaking liberals, Polanski and Kennedy. Please wake up and put the blame for immorality and the powerful abusing the weak and innocent where it belongs.
"I have heard so many different versions to the story . . . ". Read the transcripts of the child's testimony (and a full account of what happened at Chappaquidick and its aftermath) then come back here and defend Polanski and Kennedy some more. You are one who is, not so artfully, "mongering" hate, and your willful ignorance makes you look and sound pathetic and weak. Amen.
By the way, "tumbleweed", your screen-name couldn't be more apt: blown by the winds of others' opinions, hither and yon, willy-nilly, like a fence-sitter who can't decide where to land. What is hard about this? Do yourself a favor, change your screen-name to something that denotes some independence or backbone, for example, and take a stand FOR the 13-year old child that Polanski raped, and FOR Mary Jo Kopechne, may she rest in peace, whose life was snatched away from her and her family by Kennedy. You wafflers are not amusing.
I welcome the balance that TDB has lately.
Good article.
Other than a few who have "signed" some position paper, no one of the left that I know has called for leniency for Mr. Polanski.
Definition of smug:
"liberals are a feisty bunch, and unlike the right, we think for ourselves"
What a blanket, idiotic statement.
Agreed!
Liberals are smarter than you.
That's not too difficult! Scola91660 suffered atrophy of both of his (her) cortical neurons a few years ago.
Of course, only the partisan mudslingers on the right who specialize in smears would be trying to tell us that just because a few colleagues of Polanski choose to defend him, that such people represent the voice of all liberals.
The dittoheads on the right refuse to ever condemn any Republican or conservative. Limbaugh, Beck, Hannity, Coulter, Savage, et. al. never apologize for any of their multitude of misdeeds. George W. Bush could never admit that he's ever done anything wrong. The right-wingnuts march in lockstep & find ways to ignore or rationalize away every mistake committed by any one of their heroes- Ensign, Sanford, Craig, Foley, Gingrich, Livingston.
What byersl correctly described was the obvious fact that liberals are much more interested than are conservatives in self-observation & discussion of competing viewpoints. A few members of the Hollywood elite do not speak for an entire political party or political philosophy.
Outrage at Polanski's crime & his efforts to avoid punishment or responsibility for it are not a function of political philosophy.
Elitists who arrogantly disregard the rules applying to the rest of society are far more prevalent among the ranks of Republicans & conservatives than there are among Democrats or liberals. Bush & McCain are among the worst offenders. I have no use for the Hollywood elites & they are not speaking for anyone except themselves!
Thank you.
As a first time user, your comment has been submitted for review. It can take anywhere from a few hours to a day or two for your comment to be reviewed, depending on the time of week and the volume of comments we receive.
Please log in to leave comments.