Politico observes conservative women watching TV in their native habitat
posted at 10:36 pm on April 11, 2007 by Allahpundit
The identity-politics overtones make me laugh. Are conservative women so foreign to these idiots that they had to gather a bunch of them together to tell them if Calista Flockhart’s character is realistic or not? Or is the article just an excuse for the totally gratuitous photo gallery that accompanies it?
More of this, Politico. More of this.
The Hammer gets off a few good lines, but Brooke Oberwetter steals the show with her “painted whore” line. Exit question for my esteemed colleague Mr. Preston: When are these women doing Vent?
Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
“Crikey! Careful, these rare American Right-Winged Females are known to have a vicious bite and will try to take your government handouts away, DANGER! DANGER! DANGER!”
Bad Candy on April 11, 2007 at 10:55 PM
Anybody else recognize the name Ken Olin? He was one of the husbands on Thirtysomething.
I’m sure he’s very sympathetic towards conservatives. yeesh.
forged rite on April 11, 2007 at 10:56 PM
“conservative women” oh yeah, like *they* really exist! That’s an oxymoron! There’s no such thing! Bush did 9/11 … but there are NO conservative women! Islam treats women like royalty … but right wingers treat women like slaves! All TRUE womyn are liberals! blah blah blah
Tony737 on April 11, 2007 at 10:56 PM
Who knew Politico was into anthropology? At least, that’s how they seemed to approach this article.
But, ahem, in answer to my esteemed colleague’s question, as soon as possible. As soon as possible.
Bryan on April 11, 2007 at 11:02 PM
What he said.
Especially Amanda Carpenter.
Amanda B. Carpenter.
billy on April 11, 2007 at 11:04 PM
They don’t get it… as long as they feel the need to explicity spell-out a character’s conservatism–in other words, including a conservative simply for the sake of including a conservative–they are going to screw it up.
When they wrote the character for House, were they setting out to fulfill a need for “obnoxious libertarians” on TV? Probably not. They probably just set out to make an interesting character with a particular worldview that manifests itself in his behavior over time. They never had him stand up and give a speech enumerating his beliefs… that’s just silly.
DaveS on April 11, 2007 at 11:05 PM
I also like conservatives to see issues like integrity to be a black and white issue.
.
Well Done MKH.
Some things in life are/should be black and white, integrity is one of them. You have it or you don’t.
F15Mech on April 11, 2007 at 11:12 PM
Conservative women exist??? In Hollywood, the combining of the term must seem to them to be an oxymoron. Considering the continued remarks made to MM about “selling out” on her sex, liberals think all real women agree with them.
Hollywood can sometimes get things right–but not often. There are scores of films and tv shows that have been done in which the conservative/religious main character is found out to be the pervert/criminal/bigot…fill in the blank. Conservatives do not get a fair representation under normal circumstances, and it wouldn’t surprise me if Flockhart’s character on this show soon has her obligatory epiphany, and becomes a liberal.
Vanquisher on April 11, 2007 at 11:23 PM
Great slideshow. ~
Griz on April 11, 2007 at 11:27 PM
Gimme a problem and I can find a reason to blame the 2nd wave feminists.
Connie on April 12, 2007 at 12:19 AM
Kitty Litter
Kini on April 12, 2007 at 12:21 AM
I hear ya! Both LOUD and CLEAR. Calista Flockhart as a conservative. It’s about as believable as Geena Davis being a president so…par for the course.
thedecider on April 12, 2007 at 12:25 AM
I thought that too when I read this post. In La La Land, it’s always the hard-hearted conservative converting to liberalism. In reality, THIS ALMOST NEVER HAPPENS! It’s actually the opposite. One goes from liberalism to conservatism and never looks back. Remember that saying: If you’re not a liberal when you’re 25, you have no heart. If you’re not a conservative by the time you’re 35, you have no brain. There’s a reason why that adage has stuck around.
jaleach on April 12, 2007 at 12:47 AM
Those of us who find the light at an earlier age are just that much smarter…:)
Patriot33 on April 12, 2007 at 2:06 AM
I’m gonna pass on this one……..
PinkyBigglesworth on April 12, 2007 at 2:18 AM
There are levels and levels of Stupid here…….
Do we really need another illustration of how not-smart the Hollywood Left is regarding any aspect of American culture?
Janos Hunyadi on April 12, 2007 at 2:23 AM
This was a “bone” tossed out so that they can claim that Hollywood is not leftist. So, now they can say: “See, see! Flockhart playing a good conservative. We’re not liberally biased.”
It would have been nice if they had a REAL conservative playing one on TV, though, like perhaps Patricia Heaton.
So Flockhart ought to be up for consideration for an Emmy for best dramatic ACTING.
Your point, Allahpundit, that they, in their mind warped universe, simply cannot imagine how conservatives think or what they believe. They have this stereotype, this caricature, but have no idea what we really believe or feel. Nor do they care.
georgej on April 12, 2007 at 3:24 AM
I kind of liked Ally McBeal But I doubt that I’ll ever watch this show.
Always thought of Ken Olin as a ‘poor man’s’ Richard Gere, without(or maybe even with) the gerbil and Buddah.
As far as Sally Field: IMO the height of her career was the original “Smokey and the Bandit.
LegendHasIt on April 12, 2007 at 5:28 AM
Here’s a thought for the two or three lefty feminists who read this blog (forgive me for baiting honora, guys).
Off the top of my head, when I think of influential left-wing bloggers and columnists, I can list Markos Moulitas, Andrew Sullivan, Al Franken, Wonkette (now run by a guy), and Arianna Huffington.
On the right, we have Michelle Malkin, Ann Coulter, Peggy Noonan, and Glenn Reynolds. I would also note the rising profile of the women in the Politico story, particularly Mary Katharine. Let’s also not forget that the heiress to conservative godfather Bill Buckley’s legacy is Kathryn Lopez over at NRO online.
Even in the days when Gloria Steinem and Susan Sontag were getting a lot of press, we had Jeanne Kirkpatrick serving as our UN ambassador.
I’m not sure I’d go so far as to say that the conservative brain-trust is majority female these days. I think some of this may just be “selection bias,” since we see a lot of Michelle Malkin’s gal-pals in this blog.
But any liberal who think that conservative women are rare exotic creatures is just not paying attention.
Anton on April 12, 2007 at 7:52 AM
I’d like the thank the Politico photog for the picture, which I will now be using as a headshot for all my publicity.
marykatharine on April 12, 2007 at 8:08 AM
I don’t watch primetime television.
TwinkietheKid on April 12, 2007 at 8:18 AM
MKH Caption contest?
“…and then Allah said it was ‘this big!’ KP and I just laughed and laughed…”
coondawg on April 12, 2007 at 9:04 AM
I was trying to think of the best, most respectful depiction of conservatives on television from the 1980′s until present. All I’m coming up with is ‘King of the Hill.’
Canadian Infidel on April 12, 2007 at 10:00 AM
Exactly.
Esthier on April 12, 2007 at 10:15 AM
Andrew Sullivan is a conservative, I mean, that’s what he says anyway.
JaHerer22 on April 12, 2007 at 10:22 AM
Before I watcht the clip I will predict the following:
Calista’s character will be portrayed as naively idealistic, yet a bit shallow and ignorant. Someone who holds to conservative political and religious ideals, but who will succumb to the temptation to sleep with someone to get ahead… reflecting a subtle hint at religous hypocricy.
Okay to the clip:
Yep… pretty much fits the mold of what secular liberals think of conservative religous people; Shallow, Naively Ignorant, Hypocrite, and Comic Relief.
And then we get to the plot:
So, really, this show is just a new face on an old theme. Liberal TV/Media portraying conservative religious people as the bad guys.
{Zzzzzzzz}
Lawrence on April 12, 2007 at 10:25 AM
That’s what happened to me, my sister and my dad. We all started out liberal. Then we got jobs, started paying taxes, sis had few kids, (I’m one of those who defy stereotype; live in an urban area with my hubby we don’t have nor plan to have any children,) – basically reality set in, (and I started reading Michelle’s blog and listening to Laura Ingraham). Not to mention I kept seeing double-standards amongst my lib friends; some of whom “dropped” me when I became an “a-hole”, (as one ex-friend described me – funny – he never had a problem taking money from me when he was broke…?) I think the reason Hollyweird has an a$$ backwards view on that is because conservatives there have to be deeply closeted or face a blacklist. So even if they are conservative at heart, they may pretend to have converted so they can work. Also, the type of people who are successful there don’t have a problem selling their values up the river to make millions. Their souls have a price. Most of them are morally bankrupt.
foxforce91 on April 12, 2007 at 11:12 AM
And my last name is Janopsky, even though it’s spelled S-M-I-T-H. That’s what I say anyway.
thirteen28 on April 12, 2007 at 11:13 AM
Haha! Good one.
PRCalDude on April 12, 2007 at 11:20 AM
We don’t have TV. Our kids have never seen these shows, neither have we. We can keep up in a general sense – the MSM is so larded with celebrity gossip in the place of news, we sort of know what’s going on, more or less, and best of all, the kids haven’t picked up potty mouth, nilistic Left propaganda or hysteria, aren’t hyper materialistic, not image-obsessed or have developed that snarky, jaded cynical attitude that looks so horrible coming from a young person. My biggest compliant though, is how much time people spend discussing and watching pretend when the real world has so much out there to learn about and to participate in. It’s sad to hear people exclaim, “How do you survive without TV?” Sounds like something an addict would say.
I also think that there is too much fluff – shows talking about other shows – when what people want is real news, real commentary. Discovery Channel and History Channel were all doing great until the Leftie bug infected them. Shows became tacky voyeuristic – how many on “strippers?” It’s so bad, they’ve back-pedalled slightly with “classic” Discovery with the basic documentary on something fascinating in science or in the world.
A long-winded way to say, there’s no added value in watching a group of women commenting about a TV show. It’s nothingness. They can do better being occupied with something else.
naliaka on April 12, 2007 at 12:23 PM
For some reason, and having not read the article until later, I thought that name Oberwetter was some joke. Like she was Keith’s conservative sister or something. Maybe that could be his new nickname!!
Eh, Maybe not.
sweetlipsbutterhoney on April 12, 2007 at 2:38 PM