Zbig's Moral Relativism, Spacey's Primary Confusion

Photo of Mark Finkelstein.

Zbigniew Brzezinski says that since we talked to Likud, we should talk to Hamas. And Kevin Spacey, who has trouble keeping his disputed primary states straight, suggests that his "Recount" plays it straight, despite evidence to the contrary. All that and more on today's Morning Joe. In reverse order, let's begin with Zbig's appearance, and consider this statement.

ZBIGNIEW BRZEZINSKI: I have joined a bi-partisan group of some prominent Americans including Paul Volcker, Brent Scowcroft, Lee Hamilton, and some others, in saying that talking to Hamas is a necessary course of action. You know, we talked to Likud when Likud was advocating the total incorporation of the West Bank into Israel. And today Likud accepts a two-state solution. Hamas will evolve, but it will not evolve if it is continuously ostracized and threatened.

View video here.

Story Continues Below Ad ↓

The advisability of talking with Hamas can be debated. But what kind of moral relativism equates Likud, which advocated a political position, with Hamas, which supports groups that target Israeli civilians with their missiles?

Earlier, Kevin Spacey made an extended appearance to tout "Recount," his new HBO movie about Florida 2000. He tried to portray the film as playing things down the middle.

View video here.

GEIST: Kevin, so many people feel like they were cheated out of this election, they felt like Al Gore should have been the president of the United States, and it's hard to argue that this country wouldn't look very different --

MIKA: Eight years later.

GEIST: If he had been president of the United States. Based on what you learned: you met with these people, you studied the story so closely. Do you feel like Al Gore was cheated?

KEVIN SPACEY: My feeling is that what I want people to do is to watch this film and reach their own conclusions.

Very noble. But there is much surrounding the film that belies the non-partisan gloss Spacey seeks to put on it. As MRC's Brent Baker has reported, Spacey "conceded on Wednesday's Countdown on MSNBC that 'the movie is done from the Democratic point of view.'”

Dave Shiflett, reviewing "Recount" for Bloomberg.com, says the movie "portrays the Bush camp as a bunch of goons and loons" and that "Republicans in the movie are portrayed as dragons or drones." He adds: "The Democrats, by contrast, are simply trying to make every vote count."

Speaking of portraying Republicans as loons, MJ aired a clip from the movie of Laura Dern's depiction of Katherine Harris which makes the former FL Secretary of State out to be a messianic nut. See clip.

Spacey also let this little factoid slip in response to Pat Buchanan's question as to whether he's asked Al Gore about the movie:

SPACEY: I haven't. I did see Al Gore in Oslo. I was asked by the former Vice-President to host the Nobel Peace Prize concert last December.

Finally, whereas Willie lauded Spacey's knowledge of FL 2000, the Hollywood actor obviously needs to bone up on current political events.

GEIST: You know, it's so interesting, the timing of this, because just yesterday Hillary Clinton was down in Florida. The case she's making, she said it explicitly, she said Florida has learned the hard way what happens when the votes aren't all counted. So your film actually has a renewed relevance today, and throughout this election.

SPACEY: Well, I think she's making a point which is about Florida and I think, is it Vermont that is also in contention?

MIKA/GEIST/BUCHANAN: Michigan.

SPACEY: Michigan.

Michigan. Right.

—Mark Finkelstein is a NewsBusters contributing editor and host of Right Angle. Contact him at mark@gunhill.net.


Comments Policy

All comments are owned by whoever posted them and are subject to our terms of use. They should not be assumed to represent the views of NewsBusters.

Viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

There it is ol Wille

There it is ol Wille throwing out the "many people" line. We all know what that means. Well "many people" must not know how the process works and "many people" must not know how Gore lost no matter what type of trickery the Dems tried to play.

And as far as talking to these people...yeah try talking them out of a belief of killing people who don't conform to Islam because that's what their religion tells them to do. That's like trying to tell a Christian to quit believing in one of the commandments.

"They need to have a course in college called common sense and everyone should take it. Problem is there isn't too many people that could pass or teach it." -my grandfather

Mark, just before Zbig

Mark, just before Zbig joined his daughter, Mort Zuckerman was on. He was at the speech President Bush made in Israel where he mentioned appeasement. Zuckerman, who is an MSM dinosaur told the Morning Joe lynch mob that Bush never implicated Obama in his speech, and that Bush was eloquent and very powerful. Well...even Buchanan disagreed with Zuckerman regarding the implication, and Zuckerman then started to waffle. But he did say that it was outrageous to suggest we speak with Hamas without preparations. If you watched that segment, I would love to have that placed on Newsbusters as I think it was as important as Zbig's interview.

And Kevin Spacey is an idiot...I'm so disappointed, but not in the least surprised. Harris has gone on to Washington so if she was that much of a nut case, I don't think Floridians would have elected her. Also, this movie is just a jab to Floridians that I'm wondering if they are up in arms over it...any word on that?

marpel. Talking.. negotiating.. appeasement

marpel. Sorry I missed Zukerman's view. This entire scene over the president's comments is nothing but politics for an election year. It is the life blood of our biased media, and is serving no good purpose for anyone or anything but creating division among us and weakness for our common cause.

The first rule in leadership, and in winning, is in being careful in what one says publically. The candidates are reacting, not thinking.

Bush's speech was solid, strong and rather carefully crafted. On a good day, to be perfectly fair, it would not have surprised me to have seen Bill Clinton, Al Gore, certainly Sen. Hillary Clinton, and certainly Sen. Obama (even Obama has clearly stated that missile strikes against Iran are not off the table, in the current environoment) give an identical speech in a similar setting.

Moving forward. Talking.. negotiating.. appeasement. There are many varied levels of all. The candidates and the media should always carefully consider that what they say. It will be heard by many and it will have an effect on our own potential for achieving what is best for the common good.

To the best of my recollection, the Bush admin. has been talking to Iran (first since Jimmy Carter broke off relations in 1980) on a limited basis. This talking surely includes some negotiating; negociating on certain points only. Perhaps, at some level here, privately an administration might consider that a bit of this serves for a bit of apeasement. Indeed, making it look good, while the time bought is used for a purpose. However, this is never to be discussed publically - not a peep. 

Promoting ones view and vision publically is historically tested. It sets the tone and the conditions and provides the backbone of the groundrules for the ground and negotiating.

Appeasement can serve certain greater goals at certain times in certain situations, however, we don't talk about it,or we loose any advantage for the great good of humanity.

Our political candidates and the media that seeks to destroy one political party for the benefit of their own political needs, in this game that they play, in the end, only weaken our hands and the hands of our friends. We'll end up with no deck to play from.

When Bill Clinton told us that the media and we, the people, needed to forget about his personal problems and violations of his sworn oath to his country, this media of ours was there to cheer his words of such vision. When he spoke out with strong language against terror and terrorists, the MSM bit their tounge and made him look strong. When he bombed the heck out of Kosovo and Iraq (per the media's plate - without UN approval) they grumbled quietly and supported his legacy, first. When he ignored Aids, and ignored and/ore was complacent in several genocides and civil wars in Africa (millions died) and in Afghanistan, the media kept quiet and focused on attacking the Republicans on some social issue elsewhere. When he failed miserably in the MidEast talks, and violence engulfed the region, they felt his pain, and they looked forward to the days of Bush, when they could blame everything on the Republicans, once again.

(;~> gary

Very well put, Gary. This

Very well put, Gary. This was a good read. :o)

"You know, we talked to Likud"

WHAT?!?! Comparing terrorists with a political party? As sson as I read that, without reading Mark's further explanation, I had to Google it, 'cuz I was thinking to myself, "Did Likud involve themselves in terrorist activities that I never heard about?"

What the heck, they compare the Republican party with Nazis, so I guess it's not that much of a stretch...

Eh - Vermont, Michigan, I

Eh - Vermont, Michigan, I can see where you could mix up such similar states. Spacey proves that actors, for the most part, should stay off the subject of politics - and most everything else, for that matter...

What a couple of morons!

Speaking to Likud is a far cry from speaking to hamas; one is an established political party, while the other is simply a terrorist group. That anyone could try to conflate the two shows how disgusting moral relativism truly is.

As for Kevin Spacey, he didn't too much "study", because if he had he would have known that the Democrats were doing anything but trying to count every vote. In fact, the Democrats went to court specifically to disenfranchise soldiers overseas whose absentee ballots, through no fault of their own, were recieved a little later than Florida laws allowed. And the SCOFLa allowed for the votes to be disallowed, while at the same time rewriting Florida election law in an effort to extend the deadline for certification so that the recount votes could be accepted. This is the Party that claims to so love the troops and the democratic process? Spare me!

Further Evidence

Brzezinksi through Obama is seeking to finish the job Jimmy Carter could not - destroy Israel.

Obama's convenient rhetoric on the campaign trail is shallow and a lie. He still has a staff of anti-Israel foreign policy experts and the ones he "let go" will be back if he is elected and making policy.

Pat Buchannan was always anti-Israel from his early days in politics which is why he fits so nicely on the MSNBC.

Arrrrrggggghhhhhhh!

Likud was never a terrorist group, you %#*%#*%!!

talking to Hamas

Why does the media never ask what the candidates are going to talk about with the various enemies of America.  It is not like we don't know what these groups, tyrants and thugs around the world want.  You can't get them to shut up about what they want.  So the only thing left to talk about is how much we are willing to give up as a nation to appease them.  I know I not very nuanced at times but this is really must be going over my head.

Not only that...

But how can you believe whatever they DO say? We already know they lie and break their word so what's the point?
These hollywoods are sure not very bright, but boy are they good at dissing Bush.