Angelina Jolie’s Dad And Conservative Media Defend Jane Pitt Against The Liberal ‘Double Standard’

Are Liberals Fighting Fair?

Last week we got to meet Doug Pitt, Brad Pitt‘s younger brother who spoke up for his Mom and his family after Jane Pitt wrote that now infamous anti-gay, anti-Obama letter. And now Jon Voight (Angelina Jolie‘s papa) has come to the defense of Mama Pitt as well. And he’s not alone. Although many might be ‘over’ this story, I think it’s getting more interesting because we now have groups of people bashing Jane Pitt, which is garnering her more sympathy and support. Deets and a few philosophical quandaries inside.

The Hollywood Reporter says Papa Jolie supports Mama Pitt:

Brad Pitt’s father-in-law-to-be — Jon Voight — spoke out in defense of the superstar’s mother, Jane, who has come under intense fire because she wrote a letter to her local newspaper expressing conservative Christian social views—and a preference for Mitt Romney over President Barack Obama.

Academy Award-winner Voight, is more than just Angelina Jolie’s dad, he’s also one of Hollywood’s most reliable conservative voices. On Tuesday, he flatly told Fox News that he agrees with Jane Pitt’s views. “Good for her” for expressing them, Voight said.

The controversy concerning Pitt’s mom arose after she wrote a letter to Missouri’s Springfield News-Leader in which she described Obama as “a liberal who supports the killing of unborn babies and same-sex marriage.” The paradox is that Jane Pitt’s missive was intended as a plea for tolerance and a response to another News-Leader correspondent who argued that Christians should not vote for Romney because he’s a Mormon. The star’s mother argued that fellow Christians should give “prayerful consideration” to supporting the presumptive GOP nominee, who she called a man of “high morals” whose values she contrasted with those of Obama.

Because of her famous son, the roof fell in, and Pitt quickly found herself being reviled as a homophobe.

A number of leading conservative commentators, including Rush Limbaugh, also have come to Jane Pitt’s defense. The most extensive defense so far, however, has come from National Review Online columnist Michelle Malkin, who pointed out that much of the anti-Pitt vitriol has involved figures associated with Hollywood and gay groups based in California. Malkin accused both of advancing a double standard, which advocated tolerance—except for views like Jane Pitt’s.

She quoted extensively from the deluge of often-obscene Tweets that have surged through social media. One read: “BRAD PITT’S MOM WROTE AN ANTI-GAY PRO-ROMNEY EDITORIAL. KILL THE B***H.” Another: “Brad Pitt’s mom, die,” while another read, “Brad Pitt’s mother . . . what a brainless old b***h..”

Read more here.

Hmmmm, interesting… Do yo guys think there’s a liberal double standard? Do many of us call for tolerance and understanding, even as we are intolerant and refuse to understand the views from the “other side”? And if so, what’s the solution? Perhaps it’s just a matter of speaking up, without spewing hate. I’d love to hear what you guys think.

Also, Angelina Jolie and her Dad have had plenty of drama in the past. Unlike Doug and Brad Pitt (in regards to their mom), she has spoken out quite strongly against her father before. How do you think she’ll react to his statements?

Source

Share:
| Posted under: , , ,
  1. Anna

    “Kill the bitch”? Really? Since when did contrasting views become reason for advocating violence? I don’t agree with her, but why can’t people believe what they want and we let them be? She expressed her opinion, which is controversial, but there is no reason for this large of a backlash. As a bisexual, I know that there are people–including my own family–that condemn me but I don’t call for them to die or hate them. We coexist peacefully. As for a double-standard, I don’t know. I think tolerance has to come a long way (longer, for some people) for there to be a fairness.

    • Krissy

      I think that tweet needs to be taken in context, though. While there are millions of liberals in this country, just because a handful decide to write nasty tweets hardly means that they represent the entire group that identifies themselves as liberal.

      It is horrible that people would tweet that, but at the end of the day random tweets aren’t something that should be taken seriously. I think people need to consider the big picture.

    • Anna, I agree that a lot of us ‘coexist peacefully’ with family members we disagree with. But others would say–given the state of things– we’re not coexisting peacefully at all. Still, threats of violence (via twitter or otherwise) are pretty uncalled for.

      Thanks for commenting, Anna.

    • Anna

      I definitely agree with the fact that not everyone “coexists peacefully.” Living in the deep south, I’m actually observing an argument where rednecks of every kind are throwing every kind of vile, obscene insult at those they perceive as even allies of the LGBT community. I have to bite my tongue to not dish it right back to hateful bigots :D A girl can dream of a peaceful, tolerable world, right?? :)

  2. Danielle

    I think there certainly is a double standard to some extent. While I would never resort to hateful comments and attack someone’s opinions, it is REALLY hard for me to try to understand the “other side”. Specifically, because I don’t see same sex marriage as an “issue” that even needs debate. To me, it’s a right that has been stolen and NOTHING can excuse that.

    HOWEVER, I was raised with no religious affiliation or knowledge whatsoever. When I was about 22, I started researching religions for myself out of curiosity. Needless to say, I’m still an atheist and I can’t wrap my head around people who use a 2,000+ year old book to guide their thought processes. NOT TO MENTION, those who only use it as a crutch to back up their ignorance and hatred.

    Personally, and I’m sure I’ll get some crap for this, I think the world would be a better place if religion was only taught at a mature age — when minds are able to decifer what they want to take from it, if anything.

    • Danielle, you raise some good points. I can wrap my brain around the conservative media (I understand that they are products of their environment as much as I am– although that doesn’t excuse all ignorance), I do wonder if people like those tweeters do a disservice to good causes.

  3. Krissy

    I get really tired of people like Rush Limbaugh saying that liberals preach “tolerance” but don’t practice it themselves. Tolerance doesn’t mean everyone has to agree with what you say. Tolerance doesn’t mean that you get to spin records called “Barack the Magic Negro” and I am supposed to overlook that racist behavior. Tolerance doesn’t mean turning a blind eye to bigotry and injustice.

    Mrs. Pitt had every right to express herself, but other citizens also have every right to express their disagreement. I think the death threats need to be recognized for the very small minority that they are…MOST people that disagree with Mrs. Pitt aren’t sending her death threats, so I find their all inclusive stance that liberals have a double standard to be MASSIVE overreach.

    • Krissy, for sure Limbaugh’s argument is meant to serve his own purposes. And I love that you say “Tolerance doesn’t mean turning a blind eye.” I’m just curious about where the line is drawn. If you support a cause, how far do you go to express that support and if you’re against one, when you speak out can you go too far and risk becoming a bigot in your own way?

      Sort of unrelated but at Sarah Lawrence I remember somebody had spray-painted “Gay Supremacy” on the campus sidewalk once. Wasn’t sure what that meant but it always bugged me and it comes to mind now, lol.

    • Krissy

      I don’t think being a bigot has to do with speaking out against something. People can disagree and still be tolerant, and that has to do with the level of respect the disagreement is expressed in. IMO, tolerance isn’t silencing your disagreement.

      To get really specific, I think tolerance (when it comes to political matters) is when you stop trying to legally remove the rights of others. A person can disagree with gay marriage and still be tolerant, as long as they aren’t actively trying to legislate away the rights of other citizens. If you are trying to legally stop the behavior, you aren’t being tolerant of it.

  4. hmm. i disagree with the article in that i guess i don’t follow how it’s a “double standard.” first off, that would have to cast these responses as representative of a general “liberal” view of jane pitt’s letter, and that’s leagues from the truth. they’re at total odds with a progressive point of view, as well as with the vast majority of what’s been said in response to pitt. second, to call it a “double standard” also treats jane pitt’s original letter as on par with the comments quoted in the article. (as in, “see? ‘liberals’ are saying just what she said!”) uh, no. while i could not agree LESS with what jane pitt had to say, i would never put it on the same scale as what was written about her by these internet trolls.

    IMO, an internet troll is an internet troll is an internet troll. for all anyone knows, it’s folks on the right side of politics simply media-baiting. or it’s not. either way, these comments just ugly flotsam, and certainly not in keeping with any point of view, progressive, conservative, or otherwise. so i don’t think they can be compared with other forms of response to jane pitt’s letter, or to the letter itself.

    p.s. shannon – i LURVE the discussions you bring to this blog! thank you!

    • Krissy

      “an internet troll is an internet troll is an internet troll. for all anyone knows, it’s folks on the right side of politics simply media-baiting. or it’s not. either way, these comments just ugly flotsam, and certainly not in keeping with any point of view, progressive, conservative, or otherwise.”

      I agree SO MUCH! For all we know, they are 10 year old boys tweeting this for summer entertainment. I think the news media takes twitter way too seriously. I think judging mass groups of our citizens based on tweets is not very logical.

    • ha! i’d actually written “or it’s 11-year-old kids. or it’s angelina jolie herself.” before i wrote “or it’s not.” great minds, my friends, great minds….

  5. Susan

    I absolutely think there’s a double standard. I pointed that out when this issue was originally posted. We progressive liberals can’t imagine someone not being in favor of marriage equality or letting someone choose what happens to their body or whatever the hot button issue is because it seems so fundamental to us. Conservatives believe the exact opposite to the exact same degree. I’m always amazed at how we can go on and on about our views being more accepting and tolerant of all individuals, but then jump all over someone who doesn’t see it our way and call them homophobic or racist or whatever. Drives me nuts.

    Also, none of this would have even been stirred up if some editor of some small town America newspaper hadn’t wanted to make a name for him/herself. We can talk about it until we are blue in the face, but things will not change until we can get it on the ballot and get our generation out to vote.

  6. Hannah

    I see this all the time. I am somewhat of a moderate. I am socially liberal, fiscally conservative but married into a conservative catholic family.

    We do see a lot of hate often from the far right and some people say some vile things on tv, but from my experience this doesn’t represent most conservatives and is an exaggerated stereotype. I know some very, very liberal people and they are some of the most hateful, judgemental people I know who always talk about intolerance unless it applies to them but these people are also on the fringes and should not be used to represent half the country.

    I think the biggest problem is that we have a two party system so for the most part people have an us vs them attitude and it something the media on both sides does. I think most people political ideas are (or should) be more complex than simply democrat or republican. The us vs them means that often people are too quick to dismiss everything a person says simply because of a political affiliation.

  7. Leti

    It boils down to the 1st amendment, the fact that she has the right to spew her hatred of gays and then the other side has the right to spew their hatred of her views. While death threats are always uncalled for and ridiculous, the fact anyone is whining about people opposing this view is also ridiculous. Everyone has the right to oppose any view point. It doesn’t make this country biased or have a double standard. Opposing view points is what makes this country what it is. I don’t agree with her, but I will agree with her right to say it…

    Now on the other hand I do agree that there should be a major overhaul on the acceptance and tolerance of people who are different in this country, but that’s another rant for another day.

  8. Ariel

    this hate in the media has been around the past 4 years or more, people need to calm down and learn to respect others oppinions, i think we can express our disagreement without recurring to violent words like “kill that bitch” has nothing to do with being liberal or conservative. just take a look at any madonna/britney/christina vs gaga post on youtube or here, people get really nasty when they shouldn’t

  9. satty

    Brad pitts mama is irrelevant to 99.9% of the world…the media is making this more of an issue. Its her opinion… but when Kids are killling themselves because idiots like her feel like she has to say anything it infuriates me! What does it matter to YOU if I, ME, want a dick in my ass??? Fuck her fuck the media we are giving them power to dictate feelings and change…Everyone should be asking…who is this bitch?

  10. testing

    We should all be tolerant and respectful of others, as long as they are doing the same in return. When somebody is being bigoted and intolerant, regardless of where on the political spectrum they are, people should voice their disagreement.

  11. hampton

    I don’t like Obama, Mary Poppins, Rush, Hip Hop, Bette Davis films, Israel, Chiliean Sea Bass…There will be someone who will always attack for me not liking any of the former. But in America I can disagree with anyone. I am not PC. If we lived in Venezeula, Cuba, Syria,or . Korea there would be a knock at the door. Ms Pitt has the right to her opinion whether
    or not you agree with her. And who says she has to have the same ideas or ideals of her son. So Hollywood PC. The far right does not believe in gay marriage but so do lots of gay people. If the gays don’t agree with all gay agendas then they are not PC. Change started with the Boston Tea Party, the Contitution, Freedom of Speech, etc. It does not say anything about being PC.

    • Krissy

      “Ms Pitt has the right to her opinion whether
      or not you agree with her.”

      But dont the people that disagree with her have a right to express their opinions as well?

  12. debra

    I think the shame in all of this is she is now being used by both sides of the debate. She is only in the news because of her son, and she wrote a letter in response to a letter written by someone in her state saying that Christians should not vote for Romney. Now have we seen any attacks or conversation regarding the person that voiced that opinion. NoPE. I think she and her family want this all to go away. I think they are handling the right way. If you don’t respond you don’t feed the frenzy. John Voight saying he supports her stance only gave this another breath of attention. Jane Pitt is not a politician and neither is her son. And because she is the mother of a celebrity does not mean she and he have the same ideas and beliefs. Everyone has the right to agree or disagree, but because she is the mother of this particular person everyone is covering it and using her as their point or counter point. I highly doubt she understood how insane this was going to get; perhaps naive on her part. But I think just staying quite is best. People who are still going on about this want something to feed on to fuel the fire again . I don’t agree with her, but I think her wording of her opinion is the fault. Why many people are acting as if the majority of the country feels differently then she does. If that was the case this would not be an issue. Every state in the union would be allowing anyone to be married. That is not happening. There are millions of Americans that believe as she does, and millions of Americans that don’t.

    Why the beliefs of a 70+ year old woman that is not the one running for office is creating all this chatter. I wonder if all the people obsessing over what she said know the issues, are going to vote or even know where the candidates stand on issues outside these two. I bet not many.

  13. cutitout

    Its a double-double standard. Both sides do the same thing in their own circles. The slanted conservative news media is much smaller then the normal news media therefore they always play the victim hence this argument. However, most of this vitrol comes from private citizens so I’m not sure why that whore Michelle Malkin is trying to lump random tweets in with the “liberal” A.K.A thoughtful media, they don’t like it when someone points out a redneck holding a racist,poster depicting a fried-chicken eating sambo-pickaninny-Obama picking cotton and watermelon on the whitehouse front lawn at a tea party rally and say that is the face of conservatism. ..

Leave A Comment