The Call For Removing Trump’s Star Reflects A Broader Move Against Art By Association

Below is my column on the move to remove the star of Donald Trump from the Hollywood Walk of Fame. The controversy of the Trump star is trivial in comparison to the more important, and growing, question of whether art appreciation should be based to some degree on appreciating the artist.

Here is the column:


While Democrats continue debating what to do about President Trump, Hollywood has moved forward with its own unique form of impeachment. The West Hollywood City Council voted unanimously to seek the removal of the Donald Trump star from the Hollywood Walk of Fame. The removal would be based on Trump not sharing the “values” of West Hollywood.

Frankly, having a fight between Hollywood and Trump over values is like watching a battle between Arbys and Atkins over veganism. It hardly plays to their strengths. This controversy is a trivial example of a much more significant debate over whether our views of art should be shaped by our views of an artist. Efforts to punish artists have come in many ways, from retroactively pulling recognition to actively boycotting all their work.

Trump is certainly not the only star facing a literal stripping of his name. Actor Kevin Spacey had his prestigious International Emmy Founders Award for his lifetime of work revoked after he was charged with sexual abuse. Then there is the move to remove the name of John Wayne from the Orange County airport because of the disclosure of his controversial and racist statements. While I oppose the move to rename the airport, one can argue that an airport dedication is a way to honor not just the work but the life and image of a person. Industry awards, like the Oscars and the Emmys, are not recognition of good conduct but of great work.

The West Hollywood City Council cited the values of Trump and his treatment of women as proof that he no longer warrants the “privilege” of having a star. Other people clearly agree, since individuals have used everything from pick axes to paint cans to obliterate his star. Yet, if we are going to evaluate artists based on their lives and actions rather than on performances in their work, then a constellation of stars could be removed from the Hollywood Walk of Fame. There are 2,600 such stars constituting a gallery of misfits, menaces, and even alleged murderers.

For instance, silent film actor Roscoe Arbuckle stood trial for murder after a woman died during sex. Gig Young, famous for his roles in “They Shoot Horses, Don’t They?” and other films, is believed to have murdered his wife and then killed himself. Michael Jackson still has his star after his child molestation trial. Errol Flynn was notorious for his preference for underaged girls, whom he called his “San Quentin Quail.” Flynn faced charges but was found not guilty. Charlie Chaplin faced prosecution under the White Slave Traffic Act, a law also known as the Mann Act.

Even though the West Hollywood City Council cited the need to sanitize the sidewalk in light of the #TimesUp and #MeToo movements, actors with both stars and domestic abuse allegations include Charlie Sheen, Don Cornelius, and John Drew Barrymore, just to name a few. Ultimately, the future of stars on the Hollywood Walk of Fame matters little to most of us. I could also care less about “The Apprentice,” the reality show of Trump that I never watched because it falls short of my view of entertainment.

The more disturbing efforts focus on punishing artists by boycotting their past work and barring future work. This is a controversy that is coming to a head with the release of the new Woody Allen movie, “A Rainy Day In New York,” the Roman Polanski film, “An Officer and A Spy,” and the Mel Gibson movie, “Rothschild.” Writing about the sexual abuse allegations against Allen, movie critic Ann Hornaday asked, “How can we possibly tease apart individuals and their actions, and doesn’t doing so mean that we’re failing our own moral imperative to hold people to account?” She said it is a “delicate balance” in considering “crimes and misdemeanors.”

Some artists are now being held accountable by a movement to remove songs and movies, in the Hollywood version of the movement to remove confederate monuments. Various radio stations have stopped playing songs by Michael Jackson because of the allegations of sexual abuse of young boys. Disc jockey Michele Pesce joined the boycott in the wake of the “Leaving Neverland” documentary, explaining, “You cannot separate the art from the artist when it comes to using your public platform” now.

Likewise, the allegations of sexual abuse against Spacey led not only to his appropriate removal from the hit show “House of Cards” on Netflix but to his retroactive removal from his scenes in the movie “All The Money In the World.” All Quentin Tarantino films are boycotted by many police unions and their supporters because of his views on police brutality. Many people today still boycott any events or movies with Jane Fonda because of her controversial protests against the Vietnam War during the 1960s.

There is a fascinating disconnect in all of the efforts to boycott the work of artists in a city that rightfully vilifies the Joseph McCarthy era blacklisting of Hollywood producers, writers and actors because of their political views and associations, yet now considers it appropriate to boycott Mel Gibson for his alleged anti-Semitic views. Hollywood agent Ari Emanuelwrote on this several years ago, “People in the entertainment community, whether Jew or gentile, need to demonstrate that they understand how much is at stake in this by professionally shunning Gibson and refusing to work with him,” adding, “even if it means a sacrifice to their bottom line.”

The question is whether this is “sacrificing” the bottom line of profits, or something more profound, in the appreciation of art for its own sake. Is the performance of Gibson in “Braveheart” less of an art form because of his anti-Semitic raving at a traffic stop? Once these brilliant creations are made, they assume a cultural life of their own. They become as much of our social fabric as the personal story of the artist. Harvey Weinstein may be a pig but he helped to create classic films such as “Pulp Fiction,” “Good Will Hunting,” “Shakespeare In Love,” “Gangs of New York,” “The Lord of the Rings,” and more. Are these films now tainted by artistic bad blood?

If we must agree with the personal values of an artist to appreciate his or her art, our museums would be bare. Caravaggio was responsible for some of the greatest paintings in world history. He was also responsible for numerous scandals and for killing a man in a piazza. His paintings are not suddenly mundane because we know more about him. There is no original sin that leaves behind traces on art. There is just the art itself.

We need to come to some resolution on whether we can separate art from controversial artists. If Spacey preyed on young actors, there is every reason not only to keep him off future sets but to send him to prison. It would be a loss to theater of one of the great talents of this generation, but he would be just another case of wasted talent. However, his past work would no longer be truly his. It is art that stands on its own merits.

I was surprised Trump got a star for “The Apprentice.” Then again, Lassie and Rin Tin Tin also have stars. The problem is not our disagreement on the value of artistic work but whether art can be valued separately from the artist. I believe it can. As stated in “Julius Caesar,” the great play by Shakespeare, “The fault, dear Brutus, is not in our stars, but in ourselves.”

Jonathan Turley is the Shapiro Professor of Public Interest Law at George Washington University. You can follow him on Twitter @JonathanTurley.

226 thoughts on “The Call For Removing Trump’s Star Reflects A Broader Move Against Art By Association”

        1. Brainless, apparently you don’t understand what the word paranoid means or you don’t understand the concept of paranoia. That is why you are known as the Brainless Wonder.

          1. Allan is paranoid AND brainless. And he has this compulsion to respond; he feels the need to have the last word in these comment threads. Let’s see if he can keep his mouth shut — for once.

            (See ya, Allan. I have better things to do with my time.)

            1. Goodbye Brainless Wonder. Hope not to see you again. If you don’t like me taking the last word then don’t let yourself start with the first word.

      1. July 3, 2019 at 3:04 PM

        He’s a douchebag.

        I was referring to Allan.

        Allan’s a douchebag.

        1. Anonymous, you had so much trouble getting things clear you had to repeat yourself. That adds points to you becoming the New Brainless Wonder but you have a long way to go. Of course this difficulty may have been by the Brainless One herself because she is as stupid as they get.

      2. Is this the Brainless Wonder pretending to be someone else or is this someone who is trying to usurp The Brainless Wonder’s position?

  1. Peter Shilll asked for proof of voter fraud that was provided in the past. I no longer waste time looking to show him because he forgets it as soon as he turns the page. Why should I waste the time. Hmmm 58,000 illegal votes in Texas found (that is not including the potentially greater number of unfound illegal votes).

    But, I ran into this yesterday so I figured I would post it:

    https://welovetrump.com/2019/01/29/voter-fraud-judicial-watch-estimates-900000-illegal-votes-were-cast-in-2018-midterms/

    VOTER FRAUD? Judicial Watch Estimates 900,000 Illegal Votes Were Cast In 2018 Midterms!

    Here we go!

    5 months ago

    I have a feeling the Voter Fraud scandal is about to bust WIDE OPEN!

    We’ve all suspected voter fraud has been rampant for years, but now thanks to President Trump, we’re starting to actually get hard evidence and confirmation.

    Yesterday, it was uncovered that 58,000 illegal votes were cast in Texas with almost 100,000 illegal registrations on the books!

    The Texas Attorney General and Governor both personally exposed the scandal:

    President Trump even responded:

    The Boston Herald jumped on board to say “Trump is right”….take a look:

    Evidence emerged out of Texas this weekend that proves President Trump right on two critical issues facing the nation — but you’ll never hear it from the biased media obsessed with undermining his administration.

    The first is that #FakeNews exists in spades today as Americans witness a never-ending stream of botched media stories designed to smear the administration that later prove to be false.

    Secondly, voter fraud related to illegal immigration is real despite the #FakeNews media telling us otherwise.

    The two converged in spectacular fashion Friday with Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton announcing that authorities have obtained evidence that voter fraud is taking place and that yes, illegal immigrants are voting in U.S. elections.

    Both are issues that open border Democrats don’t want to talk about. The lefties would rather see dishonest media distract voters’ attention by calling the president “racist” for wanting to build the wall and for taking other common sense measures to repair our broken immigration system.

    On Friday, Paxton’s office announced the Secretary of State’s office “discovered that about 95,000 individuals identified by the Department of Public Safety as non-U.S. citizens have a matching voter registration record in Texas, and roughly 58,000 of them have voted in one or more Texas elections.” Paxton added via Twitter that, “Any illegal vote deprives Americans of their voice.”

    Could this be why the Democrat party wants to flood the U.S. with millions of illegals —to tip elections?

    continued at: https://welovetrump.com/2019/01/29/voter-fraud-judicial-watch-estimates-900000-illegal-votes-were-cast-in-2018-midterms/

    1. Peter Shill asks for proof but when it is provided Peter shill Runs away.

      There is plenty of voter fraud on the left from illegal aliens, illegal vote harvesting, illegal ballots, voting in more than one state, etc. We need to protect the American citizen’s vote but Peter doesn’t really care about American citizens whether it is their vote, their job, their entitlements or their safety. Peter is anti American citizen.

  2. I think it would be beautiful if his star could be replaced with Lupita Nyong’o – a Kenyan/Mexican actress.

  3. Diane I saw one of your vile comments to me in my email but missing on the blog. I won’t repeat what you said as everyone knows how vile you can be. Maybe you will be gone again. There are enough misfits without you and your psychiatric problems.

        1. It sounds like you might be ‘brainless’, bud. (What adult name-calls? A rhetorical question. Also, Jonathan has a civility policy.)

              1. Anonymous, maybe you are one of those ” trashy single-mothers” DSS was talking about at 3:01.PM

                    1. “A question you would do well to ask yourself, Allan: WWMAD?”

                      I don’t care but that still leaves you delusional and trashy.

              2. ( Diane? Are you delusional?) Many of us here have already answered that question, Anonymous, but I suspect that Diane would give a different answer.

  4. “There is a fascinating disconnect in all of the efforts to boycott the work of artists in a city that rightfully vilifies the Joseph McCarthy era blacklisting of Hollywood producers, writers and actors because of their political views and associations, yet now considers it appropriate to boycott Mel Gibson for his alleged anti-Semitic views. Hollywood agent Ari Emanuelwrote on this several years ago, “People in the entertainment community, whether Jew or gentile, need to demonstrate that they understand how much is at stake in this by professionally shunning Gibson and refusing to work with him,” adding, “even if it means a sacrifice to their bottom line.”

    The question is whether this is “sacrificing” the bottom line of profits, or something more profound, in the appreciation of art for its own sake. Is the performance of Gibson in “Braveheart” less of an art form because of his anti-Semitic raving at a traffic stop? Once these brilliant creations are made, they assume a cultural life of their own. They become as much of our social fabric as the personal story of the artist. Harvey Weinstein may be a pig but he helped to create classic films such as “Pulp Fiction,” “Good Will Hunting,” “Shakespeare In Love,” “Gangs of New York,” “The Lord of the Rings,” and more. Are these films now tainted by artistic bad blood?”

    Of course they are! And they have been doing a number on “Merchant of Venice” for quite some time, along these lines, and quite a few others I might mention

    Apocalypse Now and its inspiration Joseph Conrad’s Heart of Darkness are also now considered racist.

    Then there is “the patriarchy” Under this vague moniker, 90% of Western art and literature gets trashed. While it would theoretically apply to Eastern and Middle Eastern culture as well, that stuff is ok because it didnt come from “dead old white guys”

    There are more and more papers written by useless critics and academics continuously, especially now that they’re not constrained by paper anymore. The internet is filled to the brim with useless critical garbage that doesn’t hold a candle to whatever it presumes to dissect. All these nothings, these naysayers, these nabobs of negativity, are a thousand times more the problem than whatever they’re aiming their microscopes at day after day.

  5. Move over Russians collusion, Google is trying to fix the 2020 Election.
    Who knew? 😉

    Google Admits It Wants to ‘Prevent The Next Trump Situation’

    https://humanevents.com/2019/06/24/google-admits-it-wants-to-prevent-the-next-trump-situation/

    The Project Veritas investigation unmasked the Google’s plans to affect the outcome of the 2020 elections. It is backed up by testimony from the insider, leaked internal documents, and an undercover video of a senior Google executive.

    “They’re going to redefine a reality based on what they think is fair and based upon what they want, and what and is part of their agenda,” the Google insider said.

    In the video, Google’s Head of Responsible Innovation Jen Gennai criticizes Elizabeth Warren’s “misguided” suggestions on “breaking up Google”. She explains “smaller companies don’t have the resources,” unlike Google, to “prevent the next Trump situation.”

    The Google executive appears to hold the company partially responsible for the election of President Donald Trump.

    1. Silicon Valley has openly described their efforts to meddle in next year’s election.

      I also consider efforts by the mainstream media, including selective editing, to be an effort to defraud voters. How many times have we heard the media claim that Trump called racists fine people, when he actually said he was not talking about them, and that they should be “condemned totally.” The media reports none of the positive effects of his presidency, and in addition to his bona fide missteps, they use fraud to make it worse. That twists the information that voters receive like any state propaganda machine.

      1. Karen has been corrected on this. There were no “fine people” at the Charlottesville rally. It was advertised by and for Nazis – literally – and other racists, which is exactly who showed up. Posters were from the 3rd Reich. You can see them – and marchers chanting “Jews will not replace us” here:

        https://www.vox.com/2019/4/26/18517980/trump-unite-the-right-racism-defense-charlottesville

        At this point, Karen’s repeated statements – after she has been provided this information – must be chalked up as another her lies, alomg with her BS about “Obama put everything he had into defeating Netanyahu in an Israeli election”.

        She doesn’t GAF and neither should we about what she posts.

        1. “Karen has been corrected on this. There were no “fine people” at the Charlottesville rally. ”

          How does Anon know that? Did he question all the people there. No. There is no way anyone knows whether or not “fine” people were there. Despite that Anon insults another stating without question there were no “fine” people there. That is a hallmark of a chronic prevaricator and a nasty one at that.

            1. Peter, don’t be silly. I wasn’t there so I have no personal knowledge. But I do know people that live there and they have a different view from what we have been told. I find it very likely that decent people were involved along with the animals that represented the extremes.I have seen how the news can be very offhand in its approach of the truth and all too frequently provides its own bias.

              Stop being so silly all the time.

                1. “can’t make a point ”

                  Brainless, I do all the time but the only time you seem to talk about the subject matter is quoting the words of others and making stupid negative comments like this one. You don’t even have an imagination to make the insults funny or interesting.

                  1. Allan — the real “brainless one” — is making his points one bullying and abusive comment at a time. If one is looking for imaginative, “funny or interesting”, one isn’t going to find any of those qualities in Allan.

                    Whew. You’ll be tied up in your anger-management group for awhile, unless you’re skipping it again.

                  2. And psst: Whatever points you try to make “all the time”, you’re no Mike Appleton — that’s for sure.

                    1. Mike Appleton and I are quite different and he is a worthy poster. I’ve enjoyed exchanges with him because he is of a different mind and smart. That is something you will never be.

                    2. I’ve seen your very “limited” (cough, cough) exchanges with Mike. Like I said, “You’re no Mike Appleton.”

                      What you think of me is irrelevant and unimportant. I really don’t care.

                    3. “I’ve seen your very “limited” (cough, cough) exchanges with Mike.”

                      If you had looked at the very few we had you would have noted them to be cordial. Rabid individuals like you don’t have normal discussions and that is why all you do is criticize another no matter what they say. You add almost zero and if when you actually say something it is merely a talking point you do not understand.

                      You are puerile and nasty. Karen is pretty darn smart and adds a lot to the blog. If people like you didn’t exist the blog would be a much improved space. You hate the idea that anyone is able to provide ideas which make you seem illiterate.

            1. Brainless Wonder, if you wish to insult me I can understand that but insulting someone who has been as polite as can be is truly nasty solely for the sake of being nasty. I don’t expect you to understand the difference because stupidity blunts such differentiations.

                1. Brainless, why don’t you just write ibid and the location. That will save you typing the same thing over and over again.

                  1. I-always-have-to-have-the-last-word Allan is demonstrating just that. “Brainless” AND clueless.

                    1. How can anyone permit a dummy to have the last word? It’s easy but in your case not acceptable. Most of the times you have the first word when you enter into a discussion I am having that doesn’t involve you and doesn’t need your stupidity.

  6. Trump should revel in the accusation that he isn’t “sharing the “values” of West Hollywood.”

    Compuserve’s gay and kinky section was called “West Hollywood”, back when it was still notable for anything but owning the .gif format.

  7. OT: Executive order on healthcare including the all important feature of transparency signed. He is not waiting for Congress any longer. He is demanding action.

    “President Donald J. Trump is delivering on his promise to bring more healthcare price and quality transparency for American patients,”

    “The executive order accomplishes this by:

    Directing the Administration to take steps to improve price and quality transparency in healthcare.
    Requiring hospitals to publicly disclose amounts that reflect what people actually pay for services in an easy-to-read format.
    Directing HHS to begin the process of making information on out-of-pocket spending more readily available to patients before they receive care.
    Researchers, innovators, and providers will get more access to data that will help them develop tools to provide patients with more information about healthcare prices and quality.
    Improving quality measurements and making them public.
    Improve consumers’ incentives to shop for care by expanding the benefit of Health Savings Accounts (HSAs) and other tax-preferred health accounts.
    The president believes that powerful interests have kept patients in the dark about the true costs of healthcare.

    “For too long, powerful interests have blocked patients from knowing the true price and quality of healthcare, denying them the information they need to make informed choices,” the White House said. “Lack of transparency contributes to soaring costs, suppressed competition, and lower quality.”

    “When armed with accurate information, patients can often identify savings by shopping around for healthcare services,” the administration added.

    This new order is the latest policy directive from Trump on healthcare costs. The president recently signed legislation to end “gag” clauses that prevented pharmacists from letting patients know about potentially lower prices for drugs, took action to require drug manufacturers to publicly disclose drug prices in their television ads, empowered consumers and expanded affordable options like Health Reimbursement Arrangements, short-term plans, and Association Health Plans.

    Last year, the president launched a blueprint on ways to drive down drug prices and find savings for American patients. Shortly after the launch, more than a dozen drug companies froze or lowered prices causing prescription drug prices to drop for the first time in nearly 50 years.”

    1. Finally! A price list!

      There should be a price list for services clearly available to patients and it should be easy to understand. They can’t plop down a telephone directory-sized list of insurance codes.

      I also disagree with their practice of charging people different amounts, depending upon the type of insurance. Since Medicaid pays a pittance, they make up for it by overcharging people with better insurance. The price should be what it is.

      One of the problems created by insurance is that it has led to higher prices of healthcare, as there became more money to pay for it. While that has funded research and development, it has also led to the inflation of prices in general, as well as onerous extra hours of paperwork and electronic records. This could be improved.

      It also needs to come to the public’s attention that Medicare, Medicaid, Medical, and Obamacare individual policies do not pay what the better employer policies do. That leads to the best providers turning away these patients, or severely limiting the number they will accept into practice.

      On the one side, we need to lower the overall cost of healthcare. On the other, we need to improve these policies. Jacking up the cost of Obamacare with 26 forms of birth control, without a $5 copay, or taking away the copay for other services, translates to higher premiums. Taking away a copay, but giving you a higher premium than that copay, means a net loss of money. It doesn’t save you money. Voters have got to be more savvy than to fall for a trick like that. It also means that while companies struggle to keep the costs down as much as possible, they pay providers less. That makes their policies less acceptable to providers.

      I don’t think politicians should be very involved in the design of the fix of this solution. Consumer advocacy groups, health care professionals, pharmaceutical companies, medical device companies should be part of it. People may love to hate pharmaceutical companies, but they take a lot of their products. They can’t expect them to keep coming up with new innovations while resenting paying for it. It takes millions of dollars, ten years in FDA trials, and numerous failed experiments to come up with a single new drug, that they then have to race to make as much profit off of as possible before the patent runs out. That’s got to pay for all the man hours of the next failures before they get another good one.

      There may be a way to reduce the cost of the FDA process while maintaining quality. I would also like to see a way to test non-patentable products, such as supplements, as the current system makes it pointless. Big Pharma, on the other hand, has a merger problem, where it is buying up investigational new drugs rather than developing them in house.

      1. “I also disagree with their practice of charging people different amounts, depending upon the type of insurance.“

        Karen, I would be very careful with that type of interference. It inhibits innovation. As far as Medicaid is concerned it should be integrated into the system that is available to all. Certain people will not be able to manage their own care and many that don’t want to. Subsidies, deductibles and levels of care could be used to create the appropriate costs. A standard policy should be created so that the public knows what is on a standard policy and they can add or subtract based on the offerings. Higher deductibles along with choice will lead to lower total costs and more appropriate allocation of a person’s personal resources.

        Some hospitals based on their abilities will have different pricing arrangements and that is a choice people have to make when choosing to buy insurance. Obamacare totally failed the sustainability test that is essential for a program to succeed. The desire should be to offer the lowest possible premiums so that people readily accept insurance as a good value.

        Where pharmaceuticals are concerned government loves complex bureaucracies and those bureaucracies along with the FDA are responsible for much of the pricing that is over the top. Many people don’t recognize that their copays are in many cases much higher than the cash price or the price for a drug that is equally effective.

  8. OT: NYTIMES headline: President Trump imposed new sanctions on Iran during a period of high tension, having said that he preferred them to a military strike.

    It sounds like many on the left on this blog should be chearing the President but they will find something else to complain about. The left is not rational.

    1. Allan again slams what he views as the monolithic “left” and says that “many on the left on this blog should should be chearing [sic] the President” rather than complaining. (Opposing views are complaints in Allan’s mind.) Allan is one of Trump’s biggest cheerleaders and expects everyone else to follow his lead. He likes to tell us what we should think or do. He calls people “brainless” but, one has to wonder: Perhaps Allan is “the brainless one.” As he bullies, insults, and attempts to control other commenters, he fails to make his case.

      1. “Allan again slams what he views as the monolithic “left” ”

        Apparently reading comprehension is not your strong point. I view all the viewpoints on a spectrum and have said so over and over again. It is stupid to attack in your fashion of choice because it demonstrates right at the first sentence you don’t know what you are talking about.

        “(Opposing views are complaints in Allan’s mind.)”

        Opposing views are opposing views. Complaints are complaints. Your mindset seems to be a mirror image of what you believe.

        “Allan is one of Trump’s biggest cheerleaders and expects everyone else to follow his lead. ”

        Your comments get stupider and stupider as you progress. If you shut your mouth you would appear a lot smarter.

        I cheerlead for Trump because there are no alternatives and because he has done a good job despite fake news and a Congress that has been derelict in its duty. I expect everyone to argue for what they want government to do not for them to pick a ball team to blindly support. It appears from all these comments that is what you do.

        No one will be in 100% agreement with anyone.

        “He calls people “brainless” ”

        Yes, I call an anonymous poster the Brainless Wonder and you seem to fit perfectly with that descriptor espcially since if you aren’t the Brainless Wonder you are stupid enough to associate you persona with hers.

        1. Who’s “the brainless one”?? Judging from his response @ 1:04 pm, it would appear to be Allan.

          (Your anger-management group will be starting shortly, Allan, old boy. “Impulse control” will be one of the topics today, “Brainless Wonder.”)

          1. “Who’s “the brainless one”??”

            Diane, go fly one of your brooms. You have a lot to choose from.

            1. Allan “The Brainless Wonder” — a term he made up to describe himself — strikes again.

              Anger-management group in 5, buddy.

              1. No, anonymous. I used that description to define you and Diane though saying both might be repetitive.

                1. No, Allan. You were (and are) projecting when you use that term. Deep-down, it’s what you think about yourself.

                    1. You’re a smart guy — in your opinion — so you ought to be able to figure it out. I’m not about to tell you what you should be able to figure out on your own.

    2. and today the Democrat whiners are criticizing Trump for his bold gesture stepping into North Korea, which opens up more positive diplomatic possibilities. Like recognizing the end to the long finished war.

      But they don’t want peace, or diplomacy, or anything good, if it detracts from their own narrow interests!

      1. Democrats have no policy. They only have dreams that cannot be reproduced in reality so they obstruct any policy including good policy causing pain on the American citizen and family.

  9. Re: your 6/24/19 column “The Call to Removing Trump’s Star…” When I recently visited my local art museum the docent pointed to a famous pastel by Edgar Degas of young dancers and mentioned that the artist was also a well known anti-semite. Should we demand Degas’ work be pulled from art museums around the world? Probably not. Degas was a product of his times and 19th century France was noted for its prevalent anti-semitism. In today’s France an artist that publicly espoused such views would be rightly condemned and shunned by the art world. Times have changed. So it is with Donald Trump. Knowing what we now know about Trump it is doubtful he would be awarded a “star” on the Hollywood Walk of Fame today. Trump has shown himself to be a narcissistic serial sexual predator, a racist and a corrupt authoritarian who eschews any allegiance or adherence to the Constitution. Your attempt to compare Trump to other “artists” makes a mockery of the very word!

    1. In today’s France an artist that publicly espoused such views would be rightly condemned and shunned by the art world.

      Anti-semitism is perfectly acceptable in western Europe if it’s couched in the right terms. (Blah blah blah Palestinians blah blah blah)

      So it is with Donald Trump. Knowing what we now know about Trump it is doubtful he would be awarded a “star” on the Hollywood Walk of Fame today. Trump has shown himself to be a narcissistic serial sexual predator, a racist and a corrupt authoritarian who eschews any allegiance or adherence to the Constitution. Your attempt to compare Trump to other “artists” makes a mockery of the very word!

      Trump’s been an open book for three decades. One thing the rest of us know about him is that just breathing in and out, he induces partisan Democrats to expose to the world their essential ugliness.

      1. Ah, if only TIA could be reincarnated as…a Palestinian.

        And if one wants a good look at someone’s “essential ugliness”, it’s evident in many of TIA’s comments.

    2. Trump has shown himself to be a narcissistic serial sexual predator, a racist and a corrupt authoritarian who eschews any allegiance or adherence to the Constitution.

      Shown you say. Please define:
      serial sexual predator and then provide evidence to support your allegation.
      racist and then provide evidence to support your allegation.
      corrupt authoritarian and provide evidence to support your allegation that President Trump eschews allegiance or adherence to the Constitution.

      1. Sure Olly:
        serial sexual predator – see his own admission and allegations by 15 – and apparently counting women.
        racist – see anit-semitic memes he tweet copies from far right sources, his Charlottesville comments – no, Karen, there were no “fine people” at the Nazi rally – and favored insult for black political opponents as “low IQ”.
        corrupt authoritarian – see his puerposeful end run around the Congressional power of thwe purse by misuse of his emergency powers, gleeful use of the stolen SC seat by McConnell and GOP, and executive actions too numerous to count, and which of course, done in much smaller numbers by Obama were decried by the GOP as unconstitutional.

        1. Olly, apparently Anon doesn’t know what the word “define” means and doesn’t have the intellect to provide proof of his own non definitions. He is a mindless poster who has his orifices reversed.

          1. “He is a mindless poster who has his orifices reversed.”

            So says Allan, the “brainless” bully.

        2. I’ll tell you a little secret of which we regular folks are generally unawares.

          A lot of rich and famous dudes have laid around a thousand women. that’s right and I don’t mean rockstars either, just regular old billionaires and B level famous entertainment types. Now I don’t know about Donald per se, but it seems that he was both a billionaire and a top drawing TV celebrity too, and now he’s the potus. Hmmm. The truth of his existence is probably that women have been literally throwing themselves at him every day for decades.

          This warps a person’s mentality. And he’s said a few odd things that one could expect from a person who’s lived this reality. He’s not saint!

          Consider this. If one percent of that number are crazy– and let’s be honest, star F’xers are crazier than the average sample of humans– but if only 1 percent were crazy, that would be potentially 10 false accusations made purely for reasons of attention grabbing. which is what most of them wanted in the first place.

          I would be dimes to dollars that Elle columnist lady is precisely the type.

          1. A lot of rich and famous dudes have laid around a thousand women.

            I see you took Wilt Chamberlain literally.

  10. I wonder how many of the Hollywood stars realize that fifty years from now the vast majority of the population won’t know that they existed. Quick — without looking it up — who were the stars of the very popular Thin Man movies?

    1. Indubitably, a great many of them do realize that.

      I actually had heard of Lillian Gish because my high school English teacher offered a few lectures on the history of cinema back in the day; strange what sticks in your head. About 1/2 of her appearances on film were prior to 1919. However, about 1/2 of the sum of her screen and television appearances were after 1955 because she was a frequent documentary subject and occasional guest on talk shows and the like (while still making some appearances in character; her last performance was at age 93). (You watch silent film in an academic spirit, not because it’s all that entertaining).

      Bogie’s still great, more than 60 years after his death. Some of the names will survive. Never sure quite which.

  11. Put up Stalin’s Star of Soviets, Hitler’s Star of Berlin, Nixon’s Star of California, Raygun’s Star of Hollywood.

Leave a Reply