I finally got around to watching Julie & Julia, directed by Nora Ephron who also wrote the screenplay. She is Jewish and a typical Hollywood liberal. She donated to Al Franken and Obama. Here’s an example of her prose (titled “White Men” from the liberal (and very mainstream) website Huffington Post, written just before the Pennsylvania primary in 2008:
This is an election about whether the people of Pennsylvania hate blacks more than they hate women. And when I say people, I don’t mean people, I mean white men. How ironic is this? After all this time, after all these stupid articles about how powerless white men are and how they can’t even get into college because of overachieving women and affirmative action and mean lady teachers who expected them to sit still in the third grade even though they were all suffering from terminal attention deficit disorder — after all this, they turn out (surprise!) to have all the power. (As they always did, by the way; I hope you didn’t believe any of those articles.)
White men are nothing more than haters. Not even Bill Kristol is liberal enough for her.
Julie & Julia is basically about two women becoming famous cooks 50 years apart. But Ephron can’t resist an opportunity for a little propagandizing. The movie has a brief cameo appearance of Julia’s father, John McWilliams. The following is from a biography of Child:
Pasadena, where she was born in 1912, was a handsome city, known for its wealth and civic accomplishments; John McWilliams was a living symbol of the city’s prosperity. A Princeton graduate and devout Republican, he managed the Western landholdings and investments amassed by his own father and later became vice president of J. G. Boswell, one of California’s major landowners and developers. His personal and professional mission was to keep California booming, and he put a great deal of time into Pasadena community life. Julia was raised to admire his discipline and public spirit, which she did, but he also nurtured a set of rabidly right-wing convictions that she would come to abhor. The two of them split sharply during the 1950s, when John McWilliams became a strong supporter of Senator Joseph McCarthy whom Julia found despicable. Her father was also outspoken about his contempt for Jews, artists, intellectuals, and foreigners; and for most of her adult life Julia viewed him with enormous dismay, though she managed to keep loving him.
In fact, McWilliams’ anti-Jewish views were well enough known that he was mentioned, along with well-known figures such as Gerald L. K. Smith and Methodist preacher Wesley Swift, as anti-Jewish supporters of McCarthy in Aviva Weingarten’s Jewish Organizations’ Response to Communism and Senator McCarthy (see my review here).
In Julie & Julia, McWilliams is presented as a cranky supporter of McCarthy who dislikes Julia’s husband Paul, a political liberal who had lived in Paris as a poet and artist — everything that McWilliams detested. In the movie, Paul is working as a librarian in the Foreign Service when he is called to Washington where he is grilled about possible communist associations and on his sexual orientation. Julia states that she knows many people who have been persecuted by McCarthy even though they have done nothing wrong. Paul returns to France dispirited by his experience.
The movie seems to be a reasonably accurate portrayal of McWilliams — a portrayal tailor made to hammer home one of Hollywood’s favority moral lessons about the evil 1950s.
However, Ephron could have taken another tack altogether. Although Julia renounced her father’s views on McCarthy, her views on homosexuality would certainly exclude her from the culture of the mainstream media today.
Homophobia was a socially acceptable form of bigotry in midcentury America, and Julia and Paul participated without shame for many years. She often used the term pedal or pedalo — French slang for a homosexual — draping it with condescension, pity, and disapproval. “I had my hair permanented at E. Arden’s, using the same pedalo I had before (I wish all the men in OUR profession in the USA were not pedals!),” she wrote to Simca. Fashion designers were “that little bunch of Pansies,” a cooking school was “a nest of homovipers,” a Boston dinner party was “peopled by 3 fags in an expensive house…. We felt hopelessly square and left when decently possible,” and San Francisco was beautiful but full of pedals—“It appears that SF is their favorite city! I’m tired of them, talented though they are.”
So Ephron had a choice if she wanted to bring up politically volatile issues. She could have played up the angle of Julia’s father as a cranky right-wing supporter of Sen. McCarthy, or she could have played up the angle of the Childs as homophobes.
But this was a feel-good movie, so it was a no-brainer. For Ephron, part of the feel-good message is to portray Julia’s character as an enlightened liberal, just like herself — and at the same time get in yet another dig at the retrogrades who supported McCarthy while avoiding any mention of McWilliams’ civic contributions or Julia’s homophobia.
Despite the fact that McCarthy was basically right about the people he hauled before his committee (see M. Stanton Evans, Blacklisted by History: The Untold Story of Senator Joe McCarthy and His Fight Against America’s Enemies), the cause of anti-McCarthyism remains a rallying cry for the Nora Ephrons of the world — at least partly because, as Weingarten shows, so many of them were Jews.
My only surprise is that we weren’t treated to a caricature of McWilliams’s anti-Jewish attitudes.




Facing the Future as a Minority
Was the Immigration Act of 1924 Illiberal?




A stupid Hollywood movie written by a stupid liberal Jewess about a stupid TV chef? Jesus Christ, MacDonald. You’re really scraping the bottom of the barrell. This is a new low. At least the blog about the “Bratz” dolls was funny.
Geeesh, lighten up already. It was a very popular movie, especially among educated people. This is how Hollywod propaganda often works. The whole thing took only a couple of minutes of the movie.
Professor MacDonald please do not listen to the nay-sayers and please continue blogging!
Posts like this can be utilized to show exactly how Jewish Influence in the Media works. There are many, many people who still need to learn about what is really going on! Keep up the good work.
The naysayers are merely the troops following their instructions from the tattered pages of the Hasbara Playbook.
Dr. MacDonald:
I’ll echo “Heinous Heath” and “Drive by Surfer”. The Jews will scream when they and their methods are exposed to the light of day. They are starting to feel the heat.
There are many applauding you for your efforts. Keep up the good work.
Prof. MacDonald,
Thanks for highlighting Childs homophobia, and Ephron’s choice to emphasize her commie-loving.
People need to be constantly reminded that the “old” Left was entirely homophobic ["bourgeois decadence", etc.]; not until the late 60s did this change. The reason, I suspect, is its Jewish roots [just as the Right's homophobia is rooted in Jerusalem, not Athens].
“Homosexual = Left” is a modern day illusion.
What changed was the new “gay” identity; homosexuals were acceptable as long as they promoted the anti-cultural, po-mo, deconstructionist agenda; i.e., as agents of cultural subversion.
Another factor in Child’s hate, as well as Ephron’s: despite the Right’s official homophobia, and the modern ‘gay’ political stereotype, the real pre-Stonewall homosexual, like his pre-War German counterpart, was likely to be Rightist in nature.
Child hated not just hairdressers and decorators, but anti-Communists: in other words, homosexuals like J. Edgar Hoover, Whittaker Chambers, Roy Cohn, Cardinal Spellman, even Joe McCarthy [a smear, but telling] and that presumably hetero but remarkably camp William F. Buckley.
While it seems inexplicable to Lefties today, Jim Garrison’s fantasy of a homosexual-Catholic-anti-Communist conspiracy behind the Kennedy assassination would have made perfect sense to Julia and her kind.
Kudos!
i don’t think there is any evidence that Julia was anti-anti communist or that they ever were subject to anything beyond what was a routine security check back then…yet nora chose to create this false ‘red scare’…
it always amazes me that the very same people who would have it that we never never never forget the Holocaust are not only indifferent to the suffering caused by communists, but actually in support of the communists…wait a minute, after reading Macdonald I no longer wonder why…
Greatings, It agree
Thanks
Bottomless
They were not only homophobic, but, by their own standards, today!, racist.
Why do you think it took them so long to form their Multiculti coalition.
What they really wanted was an Evans Walker, Let Us Now Praise Famous Men-type Utopia. With the benevolent Jewish-lead Left ruling over time and space. There was no talk of White trash then, and there was very little talk about the darker races. For a reason.
I can’t believe it has taken so long for everyone to catch on to the joke that non-Whites can’t be racist because racism is about power and Whites have power.
And this in spite of the fact that the one group above all others accused of racism are poor Whites the most powerless demographic in the world.
But also, that this nonsense continues when it is so obvious that the Hostile Elite controlling the West works, not to build a new society or civilization, but to simply disempower Whites and empower non-Whites.
“A stupid Hollywood movie”
The movies are far from being ‘stupid’ in the sense of being ineffective tools for forming opinion. And the industry is the most Jewish there is.
“Ari Emanuel, described as a Hollywood “super agent” who called for “professionally shunning Mel Gibson and refusing to work with him, even if it means a sacrifice to their bottom line.” Link
Ari’s brother is not without influence either.
Hello!!! theoccidentalobserver.net is one of the most excellent resourceful websites of its kind. I take advantage of reading it every day. All the best.