Geee Posted April 7, 2011 Share Posted April 7, 2011 Big Hollywood:If you’re wondering why Hollywood would agree to lose hundreds of millions of dollars in kamikaze missions to produce one embarrassing anti-Bush/anti-America/anti-War-on-Terror flop after another, take a look at Paul Bond’s Hollywood Reporter piece below and then take a look at the definition of an in-kind contribution.Basically, an in-kind contribution is a perfectly legal way around fundraising limits where you help your candidate and/or party in a way that doesn’t qualify as a legal contribution. For instance, GE contributes to Democrats through an in-kind contribution we like to call MSNBC. Same with AOL through the Huffington post. And…Same with Hollywood. During the Bush years, the film industry did something it had never done before and that’s bring to life anti-American/anti-war propaganda films while America was still fighting that war. Long after the first few films had flopped, more were still greenlit — and in the case of “Green Zone” at the price of $100m more — in order to bring down Bush, aid Democrats, and lift the Leftist cause. At the time they thought they were aiding Hillary. But once Obama came along, same difference. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now