The Celebrities Behind the Anti-Gun March

gunout-march-759

Lending support to the recent anti-Second Amendment march, which was misleadingly called the “March for Our Lives,” was a sizable roster of Hollywood elites.

The participating celebrities, who are routinely shielded 24/7 by their own armed security guards, were among those who were financing and supporting the nationwide protests.

The goal in mind was a singular one—to get other people to give up their God-given and constitutionally protected right to defend themselves and their families with firearms.

The Washington, D.C. protest, along with its so-called “sibling” events, was organized and funded with a considerable amount of help from Hollywood liberals and leftist organizations. Thousands of high school students were bussed to various locales via groups and individuals with links to the Democratic Party.

Despite its official noble sounding name, numerous media outlets, including BuzzfeedNews, reported that organizers were really pushing for full-on gun control legislation. It has also become increasingly clear that the march was specifically designed to gin up the voter registration rolls for the upcoming mid-term elections.

Democratic groups in Maryland, New Jersey, New York, Pennsylvania, and Virginia boosted the number of attendees by providing free transportation for participants to Washington, D.C. According to Bethesda Magazine, a Maryland Democratic House member hosted a pre-march rally and bussed supporters to the march. And the Washington Post reported that the Democrat mayor of Baltimore arranged for thousands of students to be driven to the march by bus. Democratic groups in New York, Virginia, and Pennsylvania also reportedly provided buses to participants.

As a further incentive for the younger demographic, organizers put together a free concert with an all-star billing, which included Miley Cyrus, Ariana Grande, Common, Demi Lovato, Jennifer Hudson, Lin-Manuel Miranda, Vic Mensa, and Ben Platt.

During the concert, performers proceeded to supplement their music with politically loaded protest visuals.

– Cyrus performed “The Climb” while holding a sign that read “Never Again.”

– Lovato concluded her performance with a raised fist and the words “MSD strong!”

– After Grande sang “Be Alright” she was joined on stage by some attendees who engaged in a group hug and selfie snaps.

– Hudson closed out the show in 1960s protest fashion with a version of Bob Dylan’s “The Times They Are A-Changin’.”

A number of entertainment figures provided money to the organizers of the event, including Oprah Winfrey, Steven Spielberg, John Legend, Chrissy Teigen, and George Clooney. Taylor Swift, who has made it a point to remain apolitical, indicated that she, too, had donated to the march.

Clooney and Spielberg took to the streets to join the protesters. Other celebrities who made their presence at the march known included Kim Kardashian, Kanye West, Jimmy Fallon, Dennis Rodman, and Julianne Moore.

Paul McCartney joined in a march in New York and Amy Schumer spoke at a rally in Los Angeles.

Celebrities who used social media to digitally participate included Dwayne “The Rock” Johnson, Justin Bieber, Alyssa Milano, Michael Moore, and Debra Messing.

It is apparent that organizers of the march harbor ambition that extends far beyond the initial event. Plans are in the making to lobby lawmakers to achieve desired ends. The finance vehicle for the protest, “The March for Our Lives Action Fund,” is a 501(c)(4) nonprofit organization, which, according to records, was registered on March 8, 2018.

The majority of non-profit groups are registered as 501(c)(3) charitable organizations; this allows donors to receive a charitable tax deduction for their gifts.

However, 501(c)(4) organizations are formed in order to conduct lobbying and legislative advocacy. The choice of this nonprofit vehicle means that donors actually lose tax deductibility for their donations.

On the group’s website, “The March for Our Lives Action Fund” has telegraphed its intent to pursue lobbying, indicating that funds will be used “to fight for comprehensive gun safety legislation at the local, state, and federal level.”

The website also offers a “March for Our Lives voter registration toolkit,” which appears to be a blatant effort to boost Democratic candidates at the polls.

Advertisements

Oprah’s New Age “Wrinkle”

screen-shot-2018-03-07-at-9-16-02-am

Hollywood recently managed to take a classic fantasy novel and strip away its soul.

Author Madeleine L’Engle’s “A Wrinkle in Time,” a book published in 1962, is clearly written from a Christian perspective and eloquently communicates the author’s biblical worldview.

Ava DuVernay is the director of a current film adaptation of L’Engle’s work. Unfortunately, it is likely that the author would scarcely recognize her own story as a result of Hollywood’s reverse Midas touch that materializes in the form of New Age mysticism.

The screen version of the literary tale is simply a heavy-handed piece of contemporary cinematic propaganda with an apparent purpose of spreading a superficial New Age theology and one-dimensional feminist ideology.

Winfrey stars as a deity of sorts and appears to use the Disney movie, which is clearly designed to appeal to a younger audience, to preach a form of pagan self-worship.

In an apparent quest for praise from the politically correct crowd in the entertainment industry and film critic community, the big-screen version of “A Wrinkle in Time” places front and center the primary tenet of liberal theology, that being a highly redacted notion of diversity.

Both the original book and the current film adaptation utilize a basic plotline of a teenage girl, Meg, who along with a male friend and Meg’s little brother, embark on an intergalactic multi-dimensional search to find Meg’s longtime missing scientist father.

Mrs. Which (played by Winfrey), Mrs. Whatsit (played by Reese Witherspoon), and Mrs. Who (played by Mindy Kaling) are three mystery women with supernatural powers who magically appear in Meg’s life. The trio facilitates Meg’s access to a space-time transportation medium called a tesser, which allows an Oz-like journey to be set in motion.

In L’Engle’s original work, the three women are described as ancient star-beings, who function as guardian angels. However, in the current film adaptation they are depicted as characters similar to that of Glenda in “The Wizard of Oz,” conveying the concept that the three basically comprise a group of good witches.

As is representative of the modern payback currency of Hollywood’s brand of superficial thought, the male characters in the movie are either evil or inept.

Meg demonstrates that she is much more capable than her male counterparts in the tale. The supernatural character of male gender seems to be included for the sole purpose of bringing the element of humor to the scenes in which he appears. Known as Happy Medium (played by Zach Galifianakis) he is somewhat ambiguous in nature and wholly non-toxic in his masculinity.

At the conclusion of the movie, Meg is able to complete the story arc by securing the attendant treasured liberal value of self-esteem, and she does so by embracing the New Age and feminist ideology of the real-life Winfrey.

What is cinematically and artistically tragic is that L’Engle, much like the style of the beloved Christian literary icon C. S. Lewis, wrote her fantasy work through the lens of an explicit Christian worldview. She was an official writer-in-residence at a cathedral, and she possessed the kind of love and reverence for the Bible that so many in the film-going audience share.

L’Engle even sprinkled across the pages of her fantasy novel numerous scriptural passages from both the Old and New Testaments. But the makers of the movie somehow saw fit to surgically remove L’Engle’s quotations from the Good Book and her mention of the name Jesus, as well as any notion of the Judeo-Christian God contained in her novel.

Instead the film added “the universe” as an object of worship and did so in the prototypical New Age manner that for decades Winfrey has fostered and promulgated.

In the film, Winfrey’s character poses the following question: “What if the universe is all inside each of us?”

In order to move magically throughout time and space to the various exotic destinations embedded in the story’s plotline, one must, according to Winfrey’s character, “…become one with the universe and yourself.”

In an apparent effort to give the impression the film is in touch with current personalities, the movie adds references that are not in the book, including the names of Nelson Mandela, Oskar Schindler, Indira Gandhi, and Maya Angelou, as well as a nod to a hip hop play with the inclusion of a line from the Broadway show “Hamilton.”

With the biblical principles stripped away, “A Wrinkle in Time” is essentially a naked attempt at New Age propaganda. It is a fable cloaked in the moth-eaten fabric of cunning deception and hollow self-worship.

Huckabee Withdraws from the Board after Haters Intimidate the CMA

mike-huckabee-bass-player-600x450

Left-wing hatred, in of all places Nashville, has just politicized a country music institution.

Rather than learn a lesson from the NFL and Hollywood, a small but highly vocal group of people in Music City has managed to pressure the Country Music Association (CMA) into having former Arkansas governor Mike Huckabee withdraw as a board member from the group’s educational arm, the CMA Foundation. Last week the CMA announced two new members of the board of this charitable foundation, Huckabee and singer Chris Young.

Following the announcement, the CMA was the recipient of a hate-filled backlash over its choice of Huckabee because of the former governor’s political and religious views and solid support of President Donald Trump, as well as the fact that he is the proud father of President Trump’s current press secretary Sarah Huckabee Sanders.

Despite the fact that Huckabee’s appointment to the board was completely separate and apart from his political activity and cultural views, some in the industry for which Nashville is best known targeted their personal animus directly at the former governor.

The most vicious public statement came from country music manager Jason Owen, who happens to own Sandbox, a management company that represents Faith Hill, Little Big Town, and Kacey Musgraves, and co-owns, along with songwriter-producer Shane McAnally, the record label Monument Records. McAnally has written and produced songs for Musgraves, Kelly Clarkson, Kenny Chesney, Luke Bryan, The Band Perry, Lady Antebellum, Keith Urban, Dierks Bentley, and Miranda Lambert.

Owen labeled Huckabee’s appointment “grossly offensive” and “a shameful choice” by the CMA and its leaders. The music industry manager withdrew the support of Sandbox and Monument, declaring that the artists he handles would not work on behalf of the CMA Foundation.

Owen also intimated that he would pull his support and artists away from the entire CMA over Huckabee’s appointment, specifically focusing on the former presidential candidate’s views on marriage and his support of the NRA.

Since Karen Fairchild, who sits on the foundation board, is also one of the group members of Little Big Town, a client of Owen’s, the CMA leadership feared that Fairchild would resign from the board.

Being the consummate professional and gentleman that he is, Huckabee resigned a mere 24 hours after the announcement of his appointment in order to save the organization from having to deal with any potential turmoil.

Huckabee’s departure occurred a few hours after Owen published his screed on an industry website.

Huckabee provided an explanation for why he had decided to resign, and he did it in the form of a posting on his website, which read as follows: “I genuinely regret that some in the industry were so outraged by my appointment that they bullied the CMA and the Foundation with economic threats and vowed to withhold support for the programs for students if I remained.”

Huckabee, an ordained Southern Baptist minister, has impeccable credentials as a public servant, and his involvement in charitable endeavors is highly commendable. As a former presidential candidate, Huckabee won the 2008 Iowa Republican caucuses and finished in delegate count just behind John McCain and Mitt Romney. He additionally has to his credit the accomplishment of having hosted a successful television talk show on the Fox News Channel and currently hosts a television show on TBN.

Huckabee has been an avid musician since he was 11 years old. He is an accomplished bass guitar player and made his playing of the bass guitar a trademark practice on both his Fox News Channel show and on his current TBN show.

When he served as the governor of Arkansas, Huckabee developed a reputation as an effective leader in the area of education policy, and he is recognized as an expert in helping to integrate the arts into the school curriculum.

The small but vociferous group that derailed Huckabee’s appointment to the board of the CMA Foundation has ended up depriving the organization of having a highly qualified member serve with distinction. Since music education is so central to the CMA Foundation mission, losing an individual of Huckabee’s caliber, someone who would have made germane and invaluable contributions to the CMA board’s primary objectives, is an outrage.

Through their actions and rhetoric, certain hate-filled individuals have provided the ugliest of illustrations of exactly what discrimination looks like.

It is difficult to fathom that the country music capital of the world is lacking in individuals who are willing to speak out on behalf of an individual whose faith parallels that of country music legends Johnny Cash, Glen Campbell, Reba McEntire, Randy Travis, Josh Turner, and so many others.

“The message here is ‘Hate Wins,’” Huckabee wrote on his web site. “Bullies succeeded in making it untenable to have ‘someone like me’ involved. I would imagine however that many of the people who buy tickets and music are not that ‘unlike me.’”

The truth of the matter is Huckabee’s religious, political, and cultural views are shared by an enormous segment of the American population, many of whom were, up until now, country music consumers.

When these folks find out about the manner in which Huckabee has been treated, they just might adjust their music playlists as well as their buying habits, which may bode poorly for some contemporary country music artists and products.

Uma Thurman Tells Her Quentin Tarantino Story

Film director Quentin Tarantino has come under fire in the wake of Uma Thurman’s recent revelations to the New York Times that she was treated abysmally on the set of her star vehicle, “Kill Bill.”

Ever since the predatory behavior of disgraced movie mogul Harvey Weinstein went public, Thurman has been haunted by her own arduous encounters with Weinstein. In the Times article, though, Thurman emotionally recounts the painful injuries she suffered due to an on-set accident that she claims was covered up by Weinstein and others associated with the movie. The actress also reveals that she was spit on and choked by Tarantino during the filming.

According to Thurman, she was “dehumanized to the point of death” during the movie shoot. She now indicates that Tarantino pressured her into doing a car stunt while the final days of filming were in progress.

Thurman claims that she initially objected to participating in the scene after being told that the car, which had been converted from a stick shift to an automatic, might not be safe.

“I was scared,” she said. “The seat wasn’t screwed down properly. It was a sand road and it was not a straight road.”

After the car crash, Thurman came back from a visit to the hospital wearing a neck brace. She had a concussion, a neck injury, and her knees were severely injured. She still deals with physical problems from the accident.

Keith Adams, the stunt coordinator who worked on the “Kill Bill“ films, is now speaking out concerning Uma’s allegations, and it may be causing Tarantino to feel more than a bit uncomfortable with what is being said. In an email sent to The Hollywood Reporter, Adams recalled the day that Thurman suffered the accident and remembered that he and all of his stunt staffers were kept away from the set.

“No stunts of any kind were scheduled for the day of Ms. Thurman’s accident. All of the stunt department was put on hold and no one from the stunt department was called to set,” Adams noted.

“At no point was I notified or consulted about Ms. Thurman driving a car on camera that day,” Adams added. “Had I been involved I would have insisted not only on putting a professional driver behind the wheel but also insuring that the car itself was road worthy and safe.”

Adams remarks have served to bolster Thurman’s allegations. In her Times interview, the actress had described the 1973 Volkswagen Karmann Ghia convertible used in the scene as a “deathbox” and additionally claimed that “the seat wasn’t screwed down properly.”

Tarantino, in an apologetic interview with Deadline, characterized Thurman’s car accident as “one of the biggest regrets” of his life. The director admitted that he had engaged in both the choking and the spitting but claimed that the actress had given her consent. The film director also maintained that no one involved in the production had “ever considered it a stunt” but rather viewed it as “just driving.”

Older vehicles that are used for stunt driving during movie productions are frequently inadequately maintained. In watching the video of the crash, which is posted on Thurman’s Instragram account, it can easily be seen that the vehicle is lacking head restraints, shoulder belts, and roll bars.

The actors and broadcast union, SAG-AFTRA, indicated in a statement that the scene in question “sounds like a stunt and would be a likely safety violation.”

Clearly, the footage one sees in the video, depicting an old convertible traveling down a curved sandy road at 40 mph, is the kind of scene that should have been handled by a professional stunt person under the supervision of a stunt coordinator following proper safety procedures, thereby avoiding the exposure of undue risk to a lead actress.

Tarantino has admitted that the road Thurman drove upon while shooting the scene ended up taking a “little S-curve” for which Thurman had not been prepared.

“The circumstances of this event were negligent to the point of criminality,” Thurman stated on her Instagram account. “I do not believe though with malicious intent.”

However, the actress called the cover-up after the fact “unforgivable.” The spitting and choking episodes add to the cumulative impression that Tarantino took advantage of his leverage as a director.

Unfortunately, the director has partnered with Weinstein throughout his career. It is common knowledge in the entertainment community that anyone who worked closely with Weinstein on multiple projects, as Tarantino did, would have been well aware of Weinstein’s predatory proclivities.

Tarantino acknowledged he feels ashamed that he did not take a stronger stand and cut his ties to Weinstein.

“I knew enough to do more than I did,” the director said.

Oscars with an Agenda

shape-of-water-fb_650x400_61516718769

Over time the entertainment industry and its accompanying award shows seem to have grown ever more political, and the 90th Academy Awards ceremony looks as if it will prove to be consistent with the left-leaning trend.

The Oscars event is ostensibly designed to provide recognition to the highest achievement of motion picture artistry and has conventionally been viewed as the pinnacle of award shows. This year, however, Hollywood has a number of attendant things on its collective mind, including having to atone for a host of industry wide offenses.

Nominations for Best Picture are illustrative of the ideological and cultural issues that are stoking Academy voters’ choices. A few years back the industry was assailed by critics, via a social media hashtag, with an accusation that the Academy lacked diversity in its list of nominees.

This year’s awards season has been under assault by another hashtag, which includes references to the sexual impropriety scandals that have shaken the entertainment capital to its core.

Typically during the awards season, movie studios engage in the equivalent of a political campaign complete with press releases, advertising, and opposition research.

Ironically, Harvey Weinstein, the movie mogul accused of sexual misconduct by scores of women, was consistently a seminal figure of the pre-Oscar season and was frequently able to assist his companies in securing Oscar wins. In the aftermath of the serious charges, though, he was fired from the Weinstein Company, booted out of the Academy, and banished from the film business.

In the past, he was also reportedly alleged to have engaged in opposition research in order to diminish the prospects of the film “A Beautiful Mind,” which was competing at the time with the Miramax movie “In the Bedroom.” He purportedly leaked rumors to the press that central subject of the film John Nash was anti-Semitic.

Movie companies routinely use film advertisements that are tagged with the phrase “for your consideration,” seek press coverage, send voters direct mailers, set up star appearances at key industry events, hold lavish parties, and arrange screenings for voters through use of studio lot theaters, distribution of DVDs and downloads of respective films.

For months the campaigning for the 2018 Academy Awards has been in full motion, but the activity has primarily taken the form of studios and production companies touting the current political and cultural significance of their movies.

Best picture nominee, “Three Billboards Outside Ebbing, Missouri,” is a case in point. After the film debuted at the Venice International Film Festival and won the top prize at the Toronto International Film Festival, the film critic community anointed the movie as a favorite in the award races.

The plot centers around perceived liberal concerns embodied in the hashtag haze that hangs over Hollywood. It may be that Oscar trophies were on the minds of filmmakers who put together a story of a mother railing against a sexist, racist, and patriarchal police force.

Some critics were less than enthusiastic about the seemingly superficiality of the politically correct plotlines of the movie.

Ira Madison III of The Daily Beast characterized the movie as “tone-deaf,” “manipulative,” and “altogether offensive.”

And Wesley Morris of The New York Times referenced the “Three Billboards” filmmakers’ Oscar pandering in the following manner: “The issues of the day come and go: brutal police, sexual predators, targeted advertising. It’s like a set of postcards from a Martian lured to America by a cable news ticker and by rumors of how easily flattered and provoked we are.”

Meanwhile another Best Picture nominee, “The Shape of Water,” which could also take the award, is a highly original movie concept but its creators apparently could not avoid shoehorning into the plot societal issues that may be on the minds of many Oscar voters. It is no coincidence that the female protagonist, Best Actress nominee Sally Hawkins, who has fallen in love with an underwater being, is provided assistance with her romantic goals by an African-American co-worker and gay neighbor.

Other Best Picture nominees sport themes that seek to attract Oscar voters. “Get Out,” a horror genre film from Jordan Peele, contains subject matter that depicts racism and cultural appropriation, while Steven Spielberg’s Pentagon Papers movie, “The Post,” glorifies the press for standing up to attacks and features a noble and powerful female business head.

The fact that the substance of would-be Oscar winning films is so culturally and politically correct is an indication that the 90th Academy Awards show, which is slated for March 4, will no doubt be saturated with a kind of sermonizing that is likely to have Americans briskly switching channels.

Hollywood Picks ‘Man Show’ Kimmel to Host Post-Weinstein Oscars

jimmy-kimmel-oscars-2018-1-lg

It is difficult to decipher what exactly is driving some of Hollywood’s questionable decisions of late.

On the heels of the entertainment industry’s choice of Anita Hill as sexual harassment czar, the announcement that former co-host of “The Man Show” and current late-night political pawn Jimmy Kimmel will once again take the Oscar stage as host of the show.

This will be Kimmel’s second consecutive year as emcee, despite the fact that the results of his last go-round were anything but stellar. The telecast scored low ratings, and there was the infamous gaffe in which “La La Land” was mistakenly announced as the winner for Best Picture, when in fact “Moonlight” was the movie that had taken the top spot.

It could be that Kimmel’s recent hyper-political correctness caught the attention of the Academy, particularly when he jettisoned comedy to do opinion pieces on controversial political topics, including health care and gun control. He purposely used his show to lobby against the effort of the Republican Congress to repeal and replace Obamacare, and he received the gratitude of many on the left for helping to thwart the legislation.

CNN went so far as to declare that Kimmel was “America’s conscience.” Oddly, though, the would-be moral authority has been largely silent about the Weinstein scandal and its many offshoots.

There is a good reason for Kimmel’s reluctance to speak. Before he became the darling of the left, Kimmel and fellow comic Adam Carolla created and co-hosted “The Man Show,” a highly sexualized program, which aired on Comedy Central from 1999 until 2003.

Frequently engaging in the objectification of women and showcasing some racially-charged sketches, in a segment from one of the programs Kimmel approached women on the street and asked them to guess what he had inside his pants.

“I’ve stuffed something in my pants, and you’re allowed to feel around on the outside of the pants. You’ll have 10 seconds to then guess what is in my pants,” he said to a woman, adding that she “should use two hands.”

Kimmel later asked another female participant to “put her mouth on it,” and he made sure that another woman was at least 18 years old because “Uncle Jimmy doesn’t need to do time.”

When one of his contestants was touching him in a more aggressive manner, he told her that she was “gonna make a fine wife.”

At the end of the skit, Kimmel revealed that what he had stuffed in his pants was a zucchini with a rubber band on it.

Other crude segments featured on “The Man Show” included a faux commercial for “Bosom Springs,” a fictitious company that provided water for wet T-shirts, and a “Juggy Talent Show” in which women in sparse swimwear attire would demonstrate their implicitly sexual “talents.”

In other shows, Kimmel can be seen asking individuals he encounters on the street if they would show their underwear and enlisting advice from porn stars on domestic chores.

For the first decade or so of his ABC late-night gig, Kimmel stayed away from controversial topics and became well known for his comedic fare, including pulling practical jokes on Hollywood stars or having celebrities read mean tweets about themselves.

A politically charged Kimmel emerged in early 2017, when, after being fed Democrat talking points from Sen. Chuck Schumer, began attacking GOP legislative proposals. He also politicized the deadly Las Vegas shooting to launch into a gun control rant.

Bob Iger, CEO of Disney, which owns ABC, noticed Kimmel’s departure from comedy and excursion into activism.

“That show is to entertain,” Iger told The New York Times.

Then the Hollywood executive said something that Kimmel would be wise to pay attention to as he readies himself for the upcoming Oscar hosting gig.

Iger advised, “I think he should be careful.”

Hollywood’s Wrong on Choice of Anita Hill to Lead Sexual Harassment Commission

It has been a couple of months since allegations of sexual improprieties began to rain down on Hollywood, and the entertainment community has been struggling to come to grips with the continuing fallout.

Bombshell accusations that began with Harvey Weinstein have continued to flow and alleged perpetrators of wrongdoing now include Kevin Spacey, Dustin Hoffman, Brett Ratner, Matt Lauer, Louis C.K., Russell Simmons, Charlie Rose, Garrison Keillor, and Tavis Smiley.

Elites from the highest ranks in Hollywood have been under pressure to demonstrate major concern and provide reassurance to the public that something is going to be done to remedy the situation.

Amid all the trepidation and turmoil, the awards season quickly approaches. This is traditionally a high intensity time when the spotlight shines on the entertainment industry to the maximum degree, and the whole world tunes in to prestigious events that include the Screen Actors Guild (SAG) Awards, Critics’ Choice Awards, Grammys, Golden Globes, and, of course, the apex of awards shows, the Oscars.

The mood in the greater Los Angeles community, though, has darkened as a result of the scandals, and the awards shows themselves cannot help but be affected.

Next year’s SAG Awards ceremony, which will dole out thirteen acting awards, will feature female host Kristen Bell and will additionally have all women presenters. The Golden Globes will address the sexual impropriety issues by having all of the actresses involved, including nominees Emma Stone, Jessica Chastain, and Meryl Streep, wear black outfits while on the red carpet as well as during the ceremony itself.

As for the form of seriousness and sorrow that the Oscars will display has yet to be made known. It is highly likely, however, that a similar approach will be taken during the Academy Awards telecast.

The general form-over-substance expressions are, in many instances, rather harmless. This is not the case with regard to a recent appointment to head a new presumably powerful Hollywood group.

If there were any doubts that the entertainment community remains decidedly out of touch with the majority of its customers, the choice of Anita Hill to chair Hollywood’s newly formed Commission on Sexual Harassment and Advancing Equality in the Workplace is the latest manifestation of a kind of tone deafness on the part of Tinseltown, especially when it comes to the Hollywood brand.

Hollywood executives have decided to follow the lead of politicians in the nation’s capital, the ones who routinely convene a “blue ribbon commission” to give the perception that problems are being solved. A similar body has been created to deal with the growing list of Hollywood sexual abuse scandals.

Hollywood executives have chosen precisely the wrong individual to head the commission. The announcement that Hill would be taking the top spot came after a meeting was spearheaded by Lucasfilm President Kathleen Kennedy, Nike Foundation Founder and Co-Chair Maria Eitel, entertainment attorney Nina Shaw, and venture capitalist Freada Kapor Klein.

Hollywood’s deep concern over the issue of sexual misconduct is reflected by the power players that attended the event, which included Disney Chairman and CEO Bob Iger, Paramount Chairman and CEO Jim Gianopulos, CBS Corp. Chairman and CEO Leslie Moonves, Warner Bros. Chairman and CEO Kevin Tsujihara, Universal Chairman and CEO Jeff Shell, Sony Chairman and CEO Tony Vinciquerra, Netflix Chief Content Officer Ted Sarandos, William Morris Endeavor Co-Chairman Ari Emanuel, CAA Co-Chairman Bryan Lourd, and Founding Partner of ICM Chris Silbermann, along with the heads of the motion picture, recording, and television academies, and the actors, writers, directors, and producers guilds.

Hill achieved fame in the early 1990s when she brought forward allegations of sexual harassment during the Senate confirmation process for U.S. Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas.

The problem for Hollywood is that Hill failed to tell the truth. Her behavior was inconsistent with someone who had been a victim of sexual harassment. Hill followed Justice Thomas from one job to another, made numerous personal telephone calls to the man she claimed had sexually harassed her, and the calls continued even after she was no longer working for him. She denied having ever made the calls but changed her story after phone records were produced.

Hill initially asked that her name not be mentioned when the accusations were presented to Justice Thomas. The accusations referred to events that were supposed to have occurred when only she and Justice Thomas were in the same room, so if the allegations were true, Justice Thomas would certainly have known who had made them. The anonymity request only made sense if the charges were false.

On several occasions, Hill denied that she had communicated with a Democratic staffer. She later reversed herself when under oath.

A witness that was supposed to be corroborating Hill’s accusations claimed that Hill told her details about the supposed sexual harassment in a telephone call. However, it turned out that the call took place before Hill worked for Justice Thomas.

Polls taken following the hearings, which had been televised daily, showed that twice as many Americans believed Justice Thomas over Hill.

The left continued to attempt to smear Justice Thomas in the intervening years and even went as far as producing an HBO film, which disingenuously attempted to make Hill into a heroine.