But...but...I always thought the Hollywood Left preached acceptance of different people?

GASP!

Could they be...hypocrites???

shannon doherty and jessica simpson are republicans.......freaking brilliant.

don't forget larry gatlin and toby keith.

don't forget al barger and clay aiken.

okay..i was just making up the last one.

Al is the Libertarian Party candidate for the US Senate from Indiana

Wow.

Some spoiled, lazy, millionairehead meat puppets are actually for Bush?

Who woulda thunk it?!

What's next? America's CEOs?

Say it ain't so.

Mel Gibson is a conservative, and I'm assuming a Republican and I wouldn't say being pretty open about it hurt his career.

The rest of the ones listed don't have near the talent as Mr. Gibson, so perhaps they see it as their careers need all the positive vibe they can get. The closet comes in many forms. Can't say as I feel pity in this case.

Here's a stereotype based on fact for ya:

Hollywood tends to have more liberals because the creative soul tends to be the more tolerant, accepting of people, more appreciative of nature/critter kind, of soul, etc.

(appreciative of nature translates to a larger group of people who are environmentally aware, etc.)

They also make an assload of money for doing very little besides looking good. A lot of Hollywood liberals are steeped in guilt for having it so easy while most people have it hard.

my apologies to al barger.

i should do more research before name dropping.

i do think he is far more attractive than jessica simpson.

jack

I am more inclined toward Rodney's view of the matter.

Jack E. - you are ever gracious.

"They also make an assload of money for doing very little besides looking good. A lot of Hollywood liberals are steeped in guilt for having it so easy while most people have it hard."

Thanks, Rodney. You stole my thunder. ;)

I heard an interview with Toby Keith the other day where he said he was a registered Democrat. Surprised me when I heard it, I would have thought he was on the other side of the aisle, too.

And people like Mel Gibson and Bruce Willis can get away with being Republicans in Hollywood because they're talented as BCB said, but more importantly because the execs know they will bring in huge sums of money for the studios. Gibson spent $24 million to make The Passion and it grossed over $300 million just in the states. That's why he's still working.

So it seems fair to say that the only thing more important in Hollywood than your politics is, of course, the almighty dollar. Corporate greed runs rampant even in companies NOT run by Rebublican CEOs.

While companies do work together and don't draw political lines in their business, I would imagine, and also while I'm sure there are greedy liberals, it should be pointed out that Mel works for Icon Productions, his own media company, so technically he works for a boss who is so right wing he's constructed his own church because he thinks the pope is too liberal. He doesn't work for a greedy Democrat.

It doesn't seem Bruce is working at all. Which sucks because I like his movies.

True, Icon produced the film, but he wasn't able to distribute his own film, that's just not possible with the way the industry is set up, he had to get studio backing for distribution to theaters.

I like Bruce too. He will be in Ocean's 12 this December, he's currently filming Sin City (I have a buddy who got a role in that movie, and I also know the guy who was Bruce's stand-in) and Die Hard 4 is in the planning stages, so stay tuned, he'll be all over the place soon.

Perhaps Sandler will accept the invitation to perform at the RNC.

Here is the odd question: Is Mandy Moore a Republican, but denying it? Or has the magazine interpreted public statements she has made just a little too loosely?

Nah, come to think of it, the only important question is: WHO CARES?

A lot of Hollywood liberals are steeped in guilt for having it so easy while most people have it hard.

Typical.

Wealthy liberal celebrities who work for causes they believe in are considered bleeding hearts and do-gooders who act out of guilt over being wealthy, rather than out of the courage of their convictions and the integrity to put their money and time where their individual and collective mouths are.

Of course, I'm sure wealthy republican celebrities are immune from this condition.

Gimme a break, bhw -- it takes no courage and integrity to be a be part of the status quo in Hollywood. As a Democrat, I'm not necessarily opposed to Hollywood liberalism -- any more than Republicans are opposed to corporate conservatives. Both sides need money from somewhere. In fact, I'd like to BE a Hollywood liberal; I think it would be very fulfilling to be a part of that industry and give sacks of money to causes I believe in. But I wouldn't kid myself I was doing it because of my superior creative nature or any of that crap. I'd do it because I believed in it, and I don't doubt I'd do it because I felt I owed it to people who don't have it so good or so easy. You know, Katherine Hepburn made a good point one time about actors: "These actors who complain in interviews about 12 hour days. You sit there for 11 of them! It's not as if we're carrying sacks of feed all day."

It most certainly does take integrity to support unpopular positions in today's political climate, particularly when corporations who control your career can pull your work from the airwaves and shelves if you say something they don't like.

Besides, celebrities of all political stripes often work for causes that have no direct relationship to *American politics*. Susan Sarandon comes to mind. Why do you suggest specifically that liberal celebritites support causes out of "guilt" rather than a social conscience and an understanding of the responsibility that comes with celebrity and wealth?

"Unpopular" is relative; what's unpopular in Kansas City may be perfectly popular in Hollywood and usually is.

It's funny you should ask why I think celebrities support cause more out of guilt than the "an understanding of the responsibility that comes with celebrity and wealth," because basically I think those are the same thing. The only "responsibilities" that comes with celebrity or wealth are taxes and, I suppose, publicity; after that it's up to you. You may have a conscientious desire to help the poor that may or may not have a sense of guilt attached, but you have no "responsibility" whatsoever.

Taxes are not a responsibility. They are a legal obligation.

Responsibility is something that comes from within and that nobody can assign to or take away from someone else.

I feel a responsibility to my community, and I do contribute to its well-being in small ways. It's not guilt that drives me, but a belief that we're all in this together. If I can help bolster my community, then everyone in it will benefit, including me and my children.

People who are wealthy and/or famous can make a bigger impact because they have the money, fame, and resources to do so. I'm not sure why guilt must somehow play into social consciousness and activism.

We're just splitting hairs now, bhw. Your definitions sound like wishful thinking, but so what? I don't know that guilt MUST come into play, but it usually does -- probably for the same reason I give money to panhandlers, because I'd feel guilty if I didn't, even if they do use the money on crack.

That's interesting, because I don't give money to panhandlers and I don't feel guilty about it.

Oh I do all the time; I feel like a greedy sleazebag if I don't. I have a little (very little) money, they don't. The dollar in my pocket is probably more valuable to them than it is to me, so I hand it over. Probably there are a lot of Hollywood liberals who operate the same way; if you're making millions of dollars and sleeping with supermodels and you know a lot of people aren't making anything and sleeping with newspapers, and you know it's not going to affect you at all to write out a check for $50,000 to this or that cause, and you'll feel good about it in the process, then hey, do it. You'll sleep sounder and so will the supermodel.

I don't care to read most of your comments on this one, but I read that Darryl Hannah will be one of the celebrities at the convention.

The gossip reporters say Britney Spears was interested in possibly attending and had one of her representatives contact the campaign, but they were told that Spears wouldn't be welcomed because of her sexy, faux-controversial image.

That is all.

please read the Details article itself not the newsmax "story" about the article

Details did not compile this list.
the Republicans did.

Details interviewed Mandy's PR person in the article and got official comments on her being on the list.
Details even contacted the Repubs about why mandy was on the list since she said that she did not belong on it. but the GOP did not respond since they never admit to making mistakes.

"Nah, come to think of it, the only important question is: WHO CARES?"
Amen, Brother.

I do not give any creedence to who Hollywood is supporting. Those people are on an island so far away from my life. They do not represent the nation as a whole. Their lives are so different from the lives of the common person, so I can honestly say that they carry no clout with me as to who they support. I make my own informed decisions and vote for whom I think is the best person for me and my friends and family, not for a small group of spoiled celebrities looking to outdo one another.

Here's a stereotype based on fact for ya:

Hollywood tends to have more liberals because the creative soul tends to be the more tolerant, accepting of people, more appreciative of nature/critter kind, of soul, etc.

Um, what "facts" are these you speak of? Hollywood has people who pretend for a living and don't live in reality. The fact that people who make 50 million a year think they are immune to terrorism isn't "enlightened"- it is downright retarded.

Liberals are nothing more than faggot, wimp, anti war imbeliciles too afraid to defend the US. Funny how all the tough guys in Hollywood are Republican. all the pansy ass faggots are LOW IQ Democrats.

@ #28: Ah, it's JustOneMan's little brother.

I'm sure you're delighted that all the 'tough guys' are Republican. (You probably wouldn't think they were tough if they weren't.) Because you know the only qualification for high political office is having meat where your brains should be.

Ello Doc.

Thanks for censoring my smartarsery the other day...

I too am too afraid to defend the United States of Merica, it is too large and continental with pieces that enthrust into many seas.