Michael McKean gets political! — Page 2

oh come ON, don't you think brining Hitler up is taking this a BIT too far?! give me a break....

I made my point and you can decide what you feel is the right thing to do. If any person cannot understand my historical references to Hitler or McCarthy in the 1950s, he/she needs to read more history. Bush and Co. do not understand the right to differ. Back to theatre issues for me-point made.

Updated On: 9/9/04 at 08:15 PM

You bring up Hitler in comparison with anything other than someone attempting racial cleansing, and you automatically lose the argument. Period. The comparison cheapens what that bastard did.

Everyone has to find their own line between protest and cooperation, between accepting different opinions and standing up for your own. There are much better ways to protest Bush than to refuse to perform for his parents. Try doing something that will actually affect the election- participate in voting drives, donate money to the Kerry campaign, whatever. Small eye-catching acts of protests are nice, but I'm not sure how many votes they actually sway. And votes are all that really matter in the end.

And everynight there is bound to be a couple of Republicans in the theatre
More than a couple, doll. Theatre, especially regionally... is generally supported by wealthy GOP'ers in the majority... look at the donor lists.

I have trouble with this, because H.W. is the father, but not the man. I don't believe that H.W. deserves to be branded as a "Hitler" type, which is offensive on many levels. His presidency was a much different animal. People are so angry and impassioned that they are becoming blind. And that is dangerous.

---

The question of what to do in any given circumstance has to do always with perception: how will people perceive my actions.

I think two messages need to be sent...one, we don't approve of your politics, but two, we accept you as people -- even when you don't accept us. I don't think not talking with republican administration is like Hitler...yes, they are bad people with ignorant ideals, but...like everyone...they are not sub-human...let's be good people, and turn the other cheek here. I think Michael sent both the above messages when he performed, talked with them after, but refused to take a picture with them. I think that was not only smart, but wise.

I cannot say strongly enough that refusing to entertain people is awful -- especially when your entertainment is subversive! Do your show...it'll stick around in their minds. It may even be a seed planted for change. I understand they may view us as subhuman, but doing the same to them does not help...it doesn't force them to see the humanity of the people they judge so harshly, and it does not open their eyes to the possibility that they have been misled.

---

If they (meaning anti-gay marriage folks) didn't view me as sub-human, they wouldn't enact policies that seek not only to keep me from having the rights marriage is afforded, but also would not try and tell me that my "lifestyle" is an abomination to God. That seems pretty sub-human to me...to be simultaneously hated by God and denied your rights as a human being.

---

Does Bush Sr. even hold the same views on gays as his son?

ain't THAT the truth.

Well, nice to have that clarified. Still, I like father a whole lot better than son in this case. And he isn't one of the people going out there and making speeches about how gays are living a selfish, hedonistic lifestyle (Alan Keyes) or compare their getting married to marrying animals (Rick Santorum). Small reassurance, I know. But returning hate with hate never works.

What I love about Michael McKean is that he did what he felt was right (performed as usual, greeted the former first couple, refused photos), and he ALSO wrote and explained why he chose to do that.

Classy guy.