Sunday, January 07, 2007

Everybody SHOULD love Patty

Why the hate for Patty Heaton? Yikes. Big article about it recently in Sunday’s New York Times. People are outraged over her political and religious views. The fact that people are outraged over everything these days notwithstanding, the reaction still seems way out of whack.

She and I are polar opposites when it comes to politics, but after working with her on EVERYBODY LOVES RAYMOND, I can say, unashamedly, that…

I love Patty Heaton!!

I have never worked with a nicer, kinder, and more talented actress. She’s so down to earth it’s hard to believe she even is an actress.

This one story gives you an idea of who she really is:

In one of the episodes of RAYMOND I directed there was a scene where Patty had a splinter and Ray, trying to prove how helpful he was, was chasing her around the living room with a set of tweezers. The script called for him to catch her at the couch. Watching it, I thought, there’s more room for fun here. So I suggested we expand the bit. What if Patty rolls off the couch onto the floor? Then she tries to crawl away. But Ray grabs her ankles. She squirts away. He grabs her again. He then pulls her back, across the floor. We spent an hour working out numerous variations of this and Patty, God bless her, hung in there the whole time. Trust me when I say there are not a lot of actresses who would a) be such good sports, and b) be willing to rehearse so long and so strenuously just to perfect a one minute comedy bit. But that’s Patty.

I’m sure she will weather this storm. And go on to do more great projects. Currently she’s in a play in New York and getting terrific notices.

I just wish the people who disagree so vehemently with her views could see past them to the lovely caring person she is. It’s time to ease up already. She’s been dragged around the floor enough.

78 comments:

OhioRuthie said...

Heaton is a great actress...I've read a lot about her remarks...well its the same outspoken people who are always exercising their right to freedom of speech...that are attacking her for expressing her belief's. Ohio in general is a conservative state...I heard she is from ohio. I am also...I was like 17 before I even knew there were homosexuals and then I was like 22 when I found out women were gay too. I have a more liberal belief system but I am not about to tell Heaton she is wrong. We all have freedom of religion and freedom of speech. I'm sick of others who are always trying to tell people they are wrong because they don't think the same.
I remember the episode you referenced..it was just on the other night in reruns...loved it!

VP19 said...

We sometimes worry too much about people's political beliefs and care too little about what they're like as people. Fortunately, some of us are able to go beyond that. I think of the longtime relationship of Goldie Hawn, a liberal (albeit nowhere as strident as say, Barbra Streisand) and Kurt Russell, a libertarian with a conservative bent. If they focused exclusively on politics, they'd be at each other's throats 24/7.

Oh, and BTW, I'm that rare bird known as an anti-abortion liberal.

Douglas McEwan said...

I don't doubt Ms Heaton is a professional, even talented actress. Many conservatives are. Jimmy Stewart was as conservative as you can get and he was one of the all-time great movie actors. Miss Heaton, the primary reason I've never watched even a single episode of Everybody Loves Raymond, may be a joy to work with if you can stomach her work on behalf of evil causes, but I would prefer not to eat with her or watch her. She is welcome to express her views and work for causes she believes in. For one thing, it helps me to identify who the evil ones are.

There's a war on IN America, as well as overseas, and she and I are on opposite sides. That Heaton is willing to put in the extra work needed to make a comedy show better, as opposed, say, to Faith Ford (A friend of mine who worked on "Murphy Brown" for 5 years says Faith would roll her eyes and get impatient when Lily Tomlin or Charles Kimbrough wanted to work out a piece of comic business as you described. Faith was a "Can we just say the lines and move on. I want to get home." type.) is a fine testament to her professionalism, but it doesn't undo the evil and the deaths, caused worldwide by the politics and religion she espouses. She is still The Enemy to me, the great Peter Boyle getting along with her notwithstanding. I will never pay a cent to see her in anything, and never buy a product she advertises. This in no way inhibits her rights; it's just me exercising mine.

Anonymous said...

OhioRuthie said... "it's the same outspoken people who are always exercising their right to freedom of speech...that are attacking her for expressing her beliefs."
============

They're not attacking her for expressing her beliefs. They're attacking her for having her beliefs.

I haven't heard anyway saying she doesn't have a right to believe as she does ... but when you express a strong opinion, you shouldn't be surprised when someone else has a strong opposing opinion.

"We all have freedom of religion and freedom of speech."

Just as I have the freedom, no matter how crass, to say that you're full of it. See, that may not have been nice or even a well-considered opinion, but I still had the right to say it ... and others have the right to say that I'm full of it.

Anonymous said...

Ken. Sorely tempted as I am, I'll wait until tomorrow to respond to Douglas (hoping you'll have done so first).

The man must be hoist on his own petard. (from the Old French meaning "little fart"--a small explosive for staving in castle doors).

p.s. I'm only anonymous 'cause I haven't got the energy to resister right now. If I respond further, I'll do so.

Clint said...

Douglas,

From another Douglas (middle name), I just have to say, yes, you're certainly entitled to avoid anything with Patricia Heaton in it because of her views, just as I'm entitled to avoid anything having to do with, say, the Dixie Chicks or Alec Baldwin. The only difference is, I don't. I still listen to the Dixie Chicks on a regular basis and watch Alec Baldwin. I can do this because I've got the maturity, intellectual and emotional, to appreciate someone's art separate from one's political views, so long as they don't too much intertwine the two. Natalie Maines is an immature punk, but she can sing her guts out. Baldwin is an arrogant ass, but darned if can't still act up a storm when given the chance. The fact that you would call someone like Patricia Heaton evil--*evil*--says MUCH more about you and your state of mind than her. If there's anything that's the problem in our current society, it's polarizing, dehumanizing hyperbole like yours.

Clint said...

Some people, such as Douglas McEwan, can't help but see someone who disagrees with them as not just wrong but "evil".

This vehement view could only be held by mind bogglingly arrogant individuals with a deluded and grossly inflated sense of worth in their own opinions.

As a libertarian I would probably conclude that he is wrong about almost everything he believes in- but he would have to display individual action that I found horrific before I would consider putting him in the rather rarefied category of "evil person".

Herb Popsfarter said...

Absolutely right, Ken. If we, who lean slightly to the left, demand tolerance of out political views, we must - in turn- reciprocate this sentiment.

Whilst I think that that her views on stem-cell research amount to a phobia of a Star Trek episode, I still acknowledge her great acting talent (even in her supermarket ads) Not to mention her hotness.

Good for her for having the guts to stand up for what she believes in. Even if, IMO, it's absurd and archaic thinking.

Clint said...

Just in case anyone missed it, the second "clint" was not the same as the first "clint". As clint the second, I have to agree with the sentiment of clint the first even if I disagree with his assessment of some individuals talent or belief system.

I most emphatically do not believe that clint the first is evil.

Anonymous said...

As far as I'm concerned she's in my Mel Gibson/Arnold file. I don't watch them either.

I have a very conservative friend that will not watch Susan Serandon, because of her political beliefs, who is probably a nice lady as well. I would never dream of telling my friend she had to watch her. My mother is a liberal, now, who still won't watch Jane Fonda. I can go on and on. I know lots of people who won't watch specific actors for reasons such as this. People pick and choose who they watch based on a lot of different criteria.

I find support of Bush and his war repugnant and I'll be damned if I'm going to line the pockets of people who think it's all hunky-dory. I will add though I think the whole evil thing is over the top but to each their own. I find it much better to just not watch and go about my business.

The right side of the political spectrum has boycotts all the time against people they disagree with, often very talented people. They difference is they are a damn site more organized about it. :)

I learned a long time ago to vote with my dollars and this is me doing it.

robinz

Anonymous said...

P.S. I just want to add that not every conservative actor ends up in my Arnold/Mel/Patricia file.

I am an average, liberal, pro-choice, anti-war, feminist. That said I have a soft spot a mile wide for any non-war John Wayne movie. John Wayne westerns were so apart of my childhood that I just can't let go. I know he was a "America love it or leave it" type, who for goodness sake made The Green Berets. A lot of his movies are a snapshot of the times and very sexist. Doesn't matter a whit. Give me a The Sons of Katie Elder or Donovan's Reef any day.

I miss westerns so much. sigh...

robinz

Ryan said...

I tend to lean slightly toward the conservative side more than the liberal side of the political spectrum (though, I am on the opposite side of the fence regarding at least some of the things Heaton believes, apparently), but I just can't be bothered to take some entertainer's political opinions into consideration when watching them playing another character.

And I'm not sure how boycotting her performances would, for example, end the war any quicker (since I never watched Raymond and don't go to Broadway shows, I guess I'm effectively boycotting her performances already. Does that mean the troops are already on their way home?)

My wife does refuse to watch "30 Rock" because she says she's mad at Alec Bladwin for not moving out of the country like he said he would. Honestly, though, I think that's just an excuse she uses to get out of watching the show with me.

Ryan said...

"I find support of Bush and his war repugnant."

Not for nothing, but people can be Republican/Conservative and not be Pro-Bush or Pro-Iraq War (and, for that matter, one could be Pro-Bush and not Pro Iraq War).

There are a good many Conservatives who don't see Mr. Bush as a conservative at all. In my own opinion, Bill Clinton's presidency was far more conservative overall than GWB's. But that view comes from my own views of conservatism that excludes nearly all of the social conservative stuff.

I don't follow Patricia Heaton very closely, but I didn't see anything about her supporting the war in that NY Times article. She may have expressed that elsewhere. I don't know. But if she hasn't, then it's making something of a logical leap to go from someone being politically conservative and religious to being for the war in Iraq.

One of the problems people often have is a willingness to pigeonhole each other and assume that our labels mean more than they really do.

R.A. Porter said...

How does the calculus work, I wonder?

Do we refuse to watch the Lethal Weapon movies because Mel's a loony, sugartit-loving right winger, or do we buy the boxed set because Danny Glover blasts the administration and contributes to our causes?

Is Everybody Loves Raymond political poison because Peter Boyle was a Hollywood pinko America-hater, or is it a righteous restorative because Patty Heaton wants to save the babies?

Do we have to vet the CV of each actor, writer, grip, and teamster involved in a movie before buying a ticket? What about that girl the 2nd AD wanted to date sophomore year? Didn't he go to a Mondale-Ferraro rally to impress her?

People are free to express themselves as they see fit, both in words and in economic choices. Boycott Tim Robbins or Charlton Heston if you will; it's your money and your choice. Of course you might miss this Navy recruitment film or this bit of social commentary.

Paul said...

Seems like being a conservative in Hollywood is like being a liberal in the NRA. Can't be much fun.

In any case, people take politics too seriously. Gotta learn to accept differences and realize that we all just want life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. We just disagree on how to go about it.

Anonymous said...

How does the calculus work, I wonder?

That was my point. Everyone has to make those judgments for themselves and they do. I love the fact that George Clooney is such a liberal but I can't watch the man to save my soul. I just don't think he's that great and actor [shrug] Some judgments are made on ability and some on other things, but everyone gets to make them for themselves and any reason I don't like to watch someone is valid for me as it's my reason.

Not for nothing, but people can be Republican/Conservative and not be Pro-Bush or Pro-Iraq War (and, for that matter, one could be Pro-Bush and not Pro Iraq War).

You are of course correct but in this case I found several bios of her where they quote her as saying she supported, Bush and the war in Iraq. Now this may have changed or as is with the net may never have been true. An awful lot of people are starting to see the war differently.

I will admit that most of the information and condemnation of her is based on her Terry Schiavo comments and her stance on abortion and stem cell research. This doesn't make me like her any more. :)

In any case, people take politics too seriously. Gotta learn to accept differences and realize that we all just want life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. We just disagree on how to go about it.

I would love to go back to live and live. It's how I spent most of my life. The problem with this is that social conservative republicans keep trying to enact laws that won't let me live my life my way. They want to make sure I live it their way and that's unacceptable.

robinz

Mike Barer said...

I think many men are turned off by the character that Patty played. Debra is a strong willed woman who seems to sometimes belittle her husband. I think the interesting thing is that her character would most likely be a Democrat.
To me she seems like a down to earth likable actress.

robinz said...

If you want to talk characters, the one I most disliked was Ray. :)

Anonymous said...

Politics schmolitics. It was her remake of The Goodbye Girl that did her in.....
whottapeeceocrap.

Poodle Head said...

well, I'll take your word for it. she's invited over for dinner any day next week.

still, that supermarket strike REALLY affected me and my family. Dear sweet Patty made her choice and it affects the way I feel about her when I see her.

those public service ads don't really help either. not if you don't agree with her. I mean, Mike Farrell is probably a nice guy too and look at what he sustains for slapping his face on things he feels strongly about.

she knew the job was dangerous when she took it.

Ruairi Robinson said...

Sooo... let me get this straight - people shouldn't get stuck on her political or religious views because... she improvised comedy with you - for a WHOLE HOUR! Wow, I wonder why they didn't report on THAT in the New York Times article, to make sure it's fair and balanced. I'm sure that startling revelation would have changed everything.

(disclaimer: don't watch the show, don't know the actress, couldn't care less about her political views)

OhioRuthie said...

People can't enjoy someone's work because of their personal belief's..that is beyond ignorant. We are talking about an actress...she isn't running for president.

I don't agree with everything Patricia Heaton said...but I respect her right to feel as she does. And it in no way effects how I view her work.

I use to think conservatives were bad with name calling and passing judgements...but its clear liberals can be just as arrogant and judgemental.

People are bad and aren't worth our time unless they think like us....nothing new but still ugly and potentially dangerous.

Neil said...

My beliefs are the opposite of hers, but what's the big deal? Weren't we all brought up to be gung-ho for diversity. I actually like the fact that there is someone like her in the 99% politically left Hollywood community, just because it is healthy. We're not talking about the Supreme Court here. And she is sort of cute in those Albertson's commercials.

Hawise said...

I cannot speak to her qualities as an individual in a face-to-face situation. I find her acting mediocre but then I found Raymond mediocre. She may be a great person to have around. That being said- her public views are repellent. I would not have her near my child. Her writings and PSAs on autism make her anathema to me. That she is anti-abortion and yet can support parents who kill their autistic child is perverted and I cannot in any way support such evil. I may have misread her views but I don't think so. If she has changed her support of causes that I find near-criminal then she needs to be more public about it. Until then I feel no need to further her career. She can say what she choses, she can support what she choses. I find her repugnant, repellent and a mediocre thinker.

RAC said...

I watch 'em all, politics be damned. The art is separate from the artist in my book, and even if I wouldn't go to a political rally with them I'd probably go see them work their art on a stage. IMHO, most all boycotters are ignorant and intolerant--and on a psycho-social scale, a bit psychopathic and humorless. And I'll bet those people who boycott tv shows on the basis of politics have higher blood pressure and more heart attacks, too. Relax, people.

Now, that being said, if Adolf Hitler had a hit sitcom on the air, I'd turn off the tv, drive over to Studio City, and kick his hairy ass.

Uncle Mike said...

She may just be experiencing a backlash against the video she did regarding stem cell research. It included Jim Caveziel (speaking Aramaic?? weird...) and a few pieces of mis-information about the subject in question.

On the other hand, her slightly sanctimonious attitude in the article ("Some of my best friends have had abortions. And I'm still friends with them! Really!") isn't helping things.

Anonymous said...

I use to think conservatives were bad with name calling and passing judgements...but its clear liberals can be just as arrogant and judgemental.

People are bad and aren't worth our time unless they think like us....nothing new but still ugly and potentially dangerous.


Pot meet Kettle :)

IMHO, most all boycotters are ignorant and intolerant--and on a psycho-social scale, a bit psychopathic and humorless.

Must be more of that tolerance I keep hearing about. Seriously tolerance is in the eye of the beholder. Everyone has things they care enough to not tolerate.

robinz

RAC said...

Humorless. See? Don't let politics ruin your day, psychos.

OhioRuthie said...

Robinz

I don't tolerate child abuse in any form or animal abuse...those issues are serious to me. They cause harm.

A actress stating her opinions..please...I can't believe she would cause so much discussion. She is an actress...not a lawmaker.

I don't let public figures shape my views or determin how I vote.
I just can't stand people telling others they are evil because they don't think the same.

On a different board people are attacking her for her views on homosexuality. She can think what she wishes...I don't agree but I don't think she is evil for feeling as she does.

Anger and judgements don't allow room for understanding or growth.

Mariner Fan said...

I'm a loud-mouth atheist Norman Lear liberal, Randi Rhodes listener who works very closely with an even-tempered Christian George Bush defender, Rush Limbaugh listener. We get along famously, she's a fantastic human being. I'm just not allowed to say "Speaker Pelosi" in her presence, nor may she say "God Bless You" when I sneeze.

I'm with Ken on this one. But here's a funny thing - I've never seen Raymond and had never heard of Patricia Heaton until now (I had to Wiki her), so what do I know?

Joshua James said...

I don't know, Ken. Would you be defending her if one of her political views was that black folk are inferior, or that Jews are to blame for the world's problems?

That's how a free society works, right? Anyone is free to believe whatever they wish, and everyone else is free to call them on their bullshit, if they want.

One can be nice and pleasant to work with and have terribly bigoted views, right?

Not all bigots act like Snidely Whiplash . . .

Joshua James said...

I should add, I'm a big fan of the show as well.

But Ms. Heaton's views are bigoted and willfully ignorant, she may be nice, but so's my father, who also holds willfully ignorant and bigoted views and why we don't talk much.

Seems a bit of a Catch-22, you say Ms. Heaton should be able to hold whatever views she wants, but those of us who disagree with her have to keep it to ourselves?

That's hardly even, right?

Ken Levine said...

No, Joshua,

What I'm saying is don't agree with her views (I sure don't), boycott her shows if you like, but recognize that she is a decent person. People make her out to be evil and hateful and as someone who knows her personally, I'm just saying that view seems distorted.

elaine said...

I don't care about her political views being different from mine but I do mind she is a spokesperson for Albertsons.
We endured a 4 1/2 month strike that devasted the middle class here so -cal .
People's lives were ruined
Does she really need the money that badly?
The Raymond millions were not enough?
It really didn't show a lot of empathy or understanding for working class America.
As a SAG member, she of all people should understand what we were fighting for.
I wouldn't call for a boycott because I think that is un American but I won't pay to see her work .
It's my personal choice.
It has nothing to do with her politics and everything to do with her choice to accept money to represent a company that tried to break our union and destroyed people's lives.
Sorry if that upsets anyone because I love this blog but thats the way I feel.
elaine

baabaanne said...

I have never watched "Raymond" because I do not care for Ray Romano. Patricia Heaton is an actress, and it is my view that her politics are her own business. If she decides to use her fame to express her views, that's her business as well. I'm as liberal as a person can get, but I still believe that each person has a right to his/her opinions. "Evil?" Give me a break. Watch her or don't watch her, it's your choice.

baabaanne said...

Addendum to my last post: Despite my not watching "Everybody Loves Raynond," the series ran from 1996-2005 (I think those are the correct years). A lot of people must have liked the series.

cyndi said...

Heaton has the right to express herself, but she doesn't have the right to expect that there will be no repercussions for, as an example, injecting herself into the Terri Schiavo tragedy. I don't patronize Domino's Pizza because I don't want my pizza dollars being used to support anti-choice causes, and I don't patronize any business - whether Raymond or Albertsons - with which Heaton is affiliated for the same reasons

Anonymous said...

From a Canadian's stand point, I wasn't that hot for her acting before Raymond, and the part they wrote for her often came off as grating. And, IMO, the longer an actress plays the same part, the more the public comes to view her as that woman, not an actress playing a role, therefore, for a lot of us, we still associate PH as grating. I could argue that it's her fault for staying so long, or for not having more widely known acting gigs under her belt before she took on Debrah, or that she didn't take enough different roles in her off seasons to balance out her resume as well as get the public to see her as a versatile actress who is up for playing characters who challenge who we have grown accustom to associating her with that closely.

Take for example Brad Garrett, who now plays in Till Death. I like the new show for many reasons, but one of the reasons I don't is that he uses his normal voice and it's grating to me. It comes off as too high and too shrill. Sound familiar? If given a choice, I would prefer to watch him anything where he drops his voice. To me, that voice works, it doesn't annoy me or make me want to change the channel or stop downloading his tv show an hour after it airs because I can't be bothered to remember when it actually airs each week. :-)

So, yeah, for me, it's an individual case where actors like PH is concerned. I don't care about anyone's personal political views other than my own. I talk politics a lot with total strangers, but never do we get so heated we throw down or talk about boycotting anything other than corporations. And as a Canadian, I'm not accustom to getting wrapped up into this liberal/republican polarisation. In Canada, you can either be a socialist leftie, a conserative rightie, or a centralist. Or, you can even have the chose to support an independant party like The Green party that stands for the environment first, big business second.) The vast majority of Canadians are centralists by default because we all share views from the left (the New Democratic Party) and the right (the Conservative Party) that overlap a lot of grey areas - the same areas the central gov't party (the Liberals up here) happens to represent. It's not mystery how the Liberals have been in power more times than not in the whole history of this country.

Anyway, I personally find vilifying one actor over her public statements a waste of time and energy unless she's personally the one blowing up abortion clinics, lobbying lawmakers to abolish gay rights, or coming into someone's hometown to prevent labs from doing stem cell research by organising "peace rallies" that result in her being chained to the front doors to prevent the technicians from entering their workplace. All of those things would make me despise her personally and as a public figure who might potentially get special treatment by the cops, but I wouldn't stop watching her if I loved her acting. Thankfully, I'm not so hot on her acting, so I don't have to face a choice harder than whether to flip the channel or pack it in for the night and get some sleep.

And finally, I always maintained that the best part of Raymond was Peter Boyle and Doris Roberts. The rest of the cast was background noise for me. The storylines were redundant year after year, and the lack of balance between the characters made it hard to watch at times. Patricia was the grounded character who had to discipline her own husband weekly. (This is the grating part I was talking about earlier.) Who would want to watch that over and over again without wanting to hit Raymond upside the head through their tv themselves?! I still can't believe that show was on the air for as long as it was. I understand some of the awards, but not all of them. I certainly don't understand the salaries they got in the last five years it ran. Wow! Talk about printing free money. Must be nice.

Lilly

A_B said...

I find her despicable for a different but related reason. She not only holds views which I disagree with, she not only actively promotes and campaigns for them, but also is willing to lie in order to promote them, or is egregiously ignorant and makes statements regardless of their veracity.

Here's what she said in the advertisement:

"Amendment 2 actually makes it a Constitutional right for fertility clinics to pay women for their eggs. Low income women will be seduced [what a word! emphasis added] by big checks. Extracting donor eggs is an extremely complicated, dangerous and painful procedure ..."

She's either lying or willfully ignorant of what Amendment 2 says. Here's the text:

Amendment 2: "(4) No person may, for valuable consideration, purchase or sell human blastocysts or eggs for stem cell research or stem cell therapies and cures.

(5) Human blastocysts and eggs obtained for stem cell research or stem cell therapies and cures must have been donated with voluntary and informed consent, documented in writing."(emphasis added).

First, she's factually incorrect. Women won't get paid for the the blastocysts, and Amendment 2 certainly won't make it a Constitutional right.

So, in order to prevent passage of Amendment 2, she is willing to lie about what it says. Or, if we're being generous, she took no steps to understand what it said when she came out against it.

But what cannot be avoided is her coded language, "Low-income women will be seduced by big checks". That is old class-warfare language that was used with "well-fare" queens and other right-wing attacks. And it doesn't take a rocket scientist to understand that "low-income women", given the long history of its usage in rightwing circles, to understand it as language for "black women."

The magic of this coded language, of course, is plausible deniability.

Consequently, one would have to bend over far backwards to find Heaton simply a patsy for the ant-Amendment 2 forces as the NYT article seems to claim.

Relatedly, Heaton was a star of "The Path to 9/11" that was rife with lies and half-truths. See e.g., http://mediamatters.org/items/200612220014
Coincidence? Is Heaton just a patsy, once again, for a right-wing campaign that is full of lies and half truths? How many times is she just an innocent victim of forces outside her control?

Her pattern of willingly being in right-wing misinformation campaigns is why I find her despicable. I don't believe that she innocently engaged in these causes and was unaware of what they were.

Douglas McEwan said...

Just to clarify my POV, I don't say Heaton is evil because she disagrees with me. My Mother often disagreed with me, and I never felt she was evil.

I used the word evil because the causes she espouses, supports, and promotes cause people to DIE!

Sorry, that's evil.

And I stopped watching anything with John Wayne in it 40 years ago, when Wayne was a gung-ho part of sending my generation to murder and die in Vietnam, though his own war experiences was all in studio backlots. The fact that even before then I considered him a dreadful excuse for an actor made that easier.

But I will always enjoy Jimmy Stewart movies. He could act!

And "Paul", re your comment: "In any case, people take politics too seriously." Politics is life or death. People are being tortured and killed every day because of politics. You take it too lightly.

As for anonymous's replies, what was your name again? Mine is Douglas McEwan, and if you don't like me, you're welcome not to buy my books. The new one which will be out in the fall won't please any Bush fans.

theprofessor said...

couldn't watch patty on "raymond" because her character was in a permanent bad mood.

i watch and enjoy leah remini on "king of queens" despite the fact that she's a xenu-believing scientologist. still don't understand how smart actors can believe THAT shit....

RAB said...

I can't believe no one mentioned the funniest part of that article: Peter Boyle, a former Brother in a Roman Catholic religious teaching order, saying to Heaton "So, tell me about this Christian God of yours."

Pure comedy gold.

I may have little patience with her political views, but tolerance is not the same as approval...and if Peter Boyle counted her as a friend (and sparring partner) she deserves all the respect he would want us all to show her.

baabaanne said...

cydi: I'll bet she knew. You don't survive in the entertainment business for long if you don't make yourself aware of the reprecussions of speaking your mind on such a hot-button issue.

D. McE said...

I should, I suppose, differentiate between people who are intentionally evil, like Cheney, Hitler, Nixon, Osama, Saddam, Bush, and people who are unintentionally, even unwittingly evil, like - well - anyone who supports or follows any of the first list.

Anonymous said...

You're a television writer, all right.

Anonymous said...

I should, I suppose, differentiate between people who are intentionally evil, like Cheney, Hitler, Nixon, Osama, Saddam, Bush, and people who are unintentionally, even unwittingly evil, like - well - anyone who supports or follows any of the first list.


Awww, you invoked Godwin's Law. That means you automatically lose. Bummer.

Mike Barer said...

I am a Liberal and my I have friends of every political stripe. Here in Washington there is a rivalry with UW and WSU fans, I will cross political lines to side with fellow Cougar fans. Many of my Conservative friends are better in character than many Liberals. I think that is what is missing. By the way, Hilary Clinton supported the war. Most who support the war have notable ambitions in mind. I even respect pro-lifers because in their opinion, they are doing the right thing.
I'm not doing a kumbaya thing, but I think many of the posters on the board have friends they disagree with politically and think nothing of it.

Anonymous said...

Um, it's the extreme conservative right that started this whole "they're just stupid actors, who cares what they think?" thing anyway. Now that the shoe's on the other foot, it's Poor Crucified Patti Heaton.

Why can't Patti just shut up and act?

Anonymous said...

On a different note, I love it when people in the business who have worked with "stars" refer to them, in publication, by a familiar diminuative, e.g., "Patty". Why? Because doing so helps themselves rise above everyone else who never got the chance (poor souls) to make the star's acquaintence. It's heartwarming to know that guys like Kenny (K Lev) have grown close to those who entertain us. I know for a fact there are others who feel this way: my close friends Marty Short, Bobby DeNiro, Brucie Springsteen, Whoopnagle Goldberg, and Paul Newman -- or as he is known to me, "Chilly von Willy" (long story, wish you could have been there).

eboydowen said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Ken Levine said...

I call Patricia "Patty" because that's what I called her when we worked together, so that's the name that's in my head.

BTW -- you or anybody is welcome to call me Kenny. Can I call you Anonymy?

Anonymous said...

No, Anonymous Q. van der Nameless was the name I was given and I like it, thank you kindly.

Come on, Ken, don't you find it just a little precious when someone tells you something along the lines of "So I was working with Marty Scorsese..." And that's in a conversation, not a written piece.

Anyway, it hardly matters. The blog's great and I'm glad this thread actually brought up some interesting thoughts and comments.

Keep up the good work; I shan't bother you more.

Mike Barer said...

Ken,

Think this is a great debate topic. Lan Roberts, a Texan who is very Liberal and told me of all of Bush's evils as Governor Of Texas was a Catholic, who was Pro Life, anti Stem research and very very anti war and anti Republican. That is why I am giving Patty a benefit of the doubt.
s

Anonymous said...

So Ken Levine the genius of half-hour comedy comes up with extending a chase scene. Brilliant, Ken! How about making the writers write some funny dialogue instead of turning the thing into an I LOVE LUCY episode.

Anonymous said...

Ken, I enjoy reading your blog and want to assure you that I don't hate Patricia Heaton. I am disappointed that she spoke out about an issue that has not affected her in a personal way as it has Michael J.Fox. I think part of the overreaction has been because her statement that was intended to counter Michael's support of Claire McCaskill in Missouri. It was stated by several sources that her ad was made after Michael's. My thoughts at the time were of regret and sadness for Michael who had to leave acting as a result of Parkinsons' disease. His body was shaking uncontrollably and it was hard not be affected -it's obvious how much a cure for Parkinson's disease means to him and he represents all kinds of Americans who suffer from incurable disease and illness. Parkinson's runs in my family too and I believe that using stem cells that would otherwise be discarded is a legitimate way to find a cure. Patricia Heaton and Jim Cavazial don't have any disease which has ruined their careers that I'm aware of, and that is what people are upset about. I think if Patricia were to recognize this and apologize to Michael it might make a difference. She's entitled to her opinion of course but her stance seems hypocritical when she is unaffected by the issues on which she speaks.

Douglas McEwan said...

Dear Anonymous,
I'm unfamiliar with "Godwin's Law". But you violated Dougie's Law, which means you lose.

You see how idiotic and meaningless that is?

BTW, you also are violating Levine's Law, which is express any opinion you want, just so long as you leave your name. What was your name again, my cowardly friend? I believe that makes you a double loser, whomever you are.

Anonymous said...

Patty Heaton = Hot Button Topic! Whodathunkit?

The Master said...

Yes, and next we'll roast that bitch Ruth Buzzi!

Anonymous said...

Dougie,
"Levine's Law?" I did a search on this site and couldn't find such a thing. Can such a law's existence be corroborated by Ken?

Also, I question your use of "whomever." Although it refers to a direct object, I believe it should be "whoever."

Sincerely,
Jack Eth-- Daaaaah! You almost made me reveal my name! Curse you, Doug MacEwan, you non-cowardly, self-naming hero!

Dougie McE said...

Jack Eth-Daaaah,
In the comments section for the posting of October 27, 2006, Ken wrote:
"Ken Levine said...
Had to delete a few comments, not because they were negative but because they were from anonymous. Gotta leave your name, folks. I left one anonymous thread in there because it was a back and forth with another reader.
But truly, give whatever opinion you want but if you don't leave your name you're a coward."

He reiterated this in the comments section for December 30, 2006 when, after a reader called Ken the "Biggest Faggot Ever" (Ironically Ken isn't. I am.) Ken wrote:
"Ken Levine said...
Thank you, Connor Peterson for observing my one rule -- leave your name. Anonymous slams will be deleted."

Christopher Reeve was a hero. I'm just a man who takes his credits and blames like a man.

DM said...

Oh, and I liked the uppity, superior tone of "Whomever".

Anonymous said...

Well then, DM, if you're not a hero for putting your name on your letters, then I'm not a coward for choosing to remain anonymous. This may be the stupidest thread in which I've ever bothered to be involved. The American military at Abu Ghraib were cowards. I'm just a guy who prefers anonymity so that I don't run the risk of someone sending stupid emails to my regular email address which, apparently, isn't too terribly difficult to find.

By the way, how exactly does one "[blame] like a man?"

Anonymous said...

Also, Doug, does anyone who reads this think there's a guy actually named "Herb Popsfarter?" Get real: nearly everyone posting to this is anonymous. I, on the other hand, had the courage to call myself "anonymous," not some 3rd grade nom de plume.

But since it is a law, after all, I remain,

Your faithful servant,
Mike Hunt

Steven said...

I'm just glad to know that Clint II is in at least partial agreement with Clint I. I hope that Clint III, whenever his time comes, will carry on the policies of the Clint dynasty.

Doug McE said...

Hi Mike,
I have no idea why Ma & Pa Popsfarter chose the strange name "Herb" for their offspring, but it was good enough for my late Great-Uncle Herb Puett. I do know that when I click on Herb's name it takes me to his website, from which he can be contacted. Anyway, it's Ken's rule, not mine, though I agree with it.

One doesn't "Blame like a man". One takes blame like a man, as my whole sentence makes perfectly clear. It is a foreign concept to much of the right-wing, where evading blame and buck-passing are survival skills. I believe they offer a merit badge in it.

"Hero" is not the only alternative to "Coward". Hero is an overused word. Amazing role models, like Chris Reeve, and people who risk their lives to save others, like the firemen who died on 9-11, are heroes. Applying it where it isn't earned devalues it where it counts.
In any event, hiding from emails is still hiding. And it was Ken, as quoted above, who first tossed the word into the mix, for those who lack the courage of their convictions.

You have however, written something I agree with, your Abu Ghraib comment.

But you still haven't defined "Godwin's Law".

Anonymous said...

Re: Godwin's Law. I think you have me confused with some other 'nonymous.

Kudos on bon mot on the Popsfarter subject -- when everyone expected you to zig, you zagged! Hope that job on "According To Jim" is working out.

As for the "blaming like a man," of course I knew what you meant. But, you whole sentence did NOT make that clear and that's what I was pointing out. Time to review your Strunk and White, Doug.

On to the coward question: by applying your own logic and by recognizing that you agree with my assessment of the military at Abu Ghraib, it devalues the meaning of the word "coward" to equate those criminals with those who choose not to put their names on this.

But you're right; it's Ken's rule. This will be the last of my nameless ramblings. But seriously, there are a hell of a lot of entries on here that can't really be attributed to anyone identifiable.

Albert Finny said...

Love your blog Ken but when Patty Heaton uses her voice to mislead the public regarding stem cell research, she should be able to hear the voices of those who disagree with her.

Advocating for the slowing of science because it doesn't jive with your personal relgious beliefs, in my opinion, hurts the cause.

See you on your next posting.

D McEwan said...

How many anonymouses am I debating with?

Again, it was Ken who first applied "Coward" to anonmymous slams, yet acts of cowardice they are. Does Bert Lahr's charming Cowardly Lion debase the word?

You're right about my sentence: in trying to conform to Strunk & White's rule #19: Express coordinate ideas in similar form, I ran afoul of #20: Keep related words together. (My Strunk & White lives here beside my computer.) My sentence should have been: I'm just a man who takes his credits and accepts his blame like a man.

Sorry. I not only do not work on "According to Jim", but that's another show of which I've yet to see an episode, though I smoked a joint or two with Jim Belushi at The Comedy Store back in 1980. In fact, I don't write for sit-coms at all. I've written a lot of stage, a couple books, and a hell of a lot of radio, but I've never worked on a sit-com. One of my closest friends wrote for "Still Standing" for 3 seasons, but she's deeply ashamed of that fact, though she didn't write them as "Anonymous".

Yes, there are "a hell of a lot of entries on here that can't really be attributed to anyone identifiable." Is that your excuse? As my mother was wont to say, if everybody dove off a cliff ...

Everybody, grow a pair and sign your slams.

Anonymous said...

You're a smart guy, Doug. Surely you can use The Google to look up "Godwin's Law."

Anonymous said...

Oh for God's sake, Doug: "The Cowardly Lion?"

And an already idiotic thread plumbs a new depth of stupidity.

By the way, your friend who wrote "Still Standing," though deeply ashamed, and didn't write them anonymously got more than $20,000 plus residuals in script fees alone per episode. That's some courage.

Must run -- gotta finish my "Becker" spec.

D. McEwan said...

Let me see if I understand this "Godwin's Law" refutation correctly: I included Hitler's name in a list of "Intentionally Evil People" and this, ipso facto, invalidates my point?

So, are you saying Hitler was not intentionally evil, whomever you are?

The Barefoot Bum said...

I'm entirely unsympathetic to Heaton's plight. It's not because I disagree with her (which I do), but because she's identified herself with a movement that has been demonizing liberals for nearly a decade. If she's lost the personal esteem of her peers who have been subjected daily to the most vitriolic rhetoric since we repudiated McCarthy, well too bad.

Cry me a river, conservative.

More at Po' Little Patty Heaton.

Ted Geisel said...

She’s a mean one, Patricia Heaton. She really is a heel. She’s as cuddly as a cactus,
She’s as charming as an eel, Patricia Heaton. She’s a bad banana with a greasy black peel.


She’s a monster, Patricia Heaton. Her heart's an empty hole. Her brain is full of spiders,
She’s got garlic in her soul, Patricia Heaton. I wouldn't touch her, with a thirty-nine-and-a-half foot pole.


She’s a vile one, Patricia Heaton. She has termites in her smile. She has all the tender sweetness of a seasick crocodile, Patricia Heaton. In fact, given the choice between the two of them I'd take the seasick crocodile.


She’s a foul one, Patricia Heaton. She’s a nasty, wasty skunk. Her heart is full of unwashed socks, her soul is full of gunk, Patricia Heaton. The three words that best describe her, are, and I quote: "Stink. Stank. Stunk."


She’s a rotter, Patricia Heaton. She’s the queen of sinful sots. Her heart's a dead tomato splot with moldy purple spots, Patricia Heaton. Her soul is an apalling dump heap overflowing with the most disgraceful assortment of deplorable rubbish imaginable, mangled up in tangled up knots.


She nauseates me, Patricia Heaton. With a nauseaus super-naus. She’s a crooked jerky jockey and She drives a crooked horse, Patricia Heaton. She’s a three-decker sauerkraut and toadstool sandwich with arsenic sauce.

Pat H. said...

Is the Douglas McEwan on here talking about his books the same DM who wrote "My Lush Life"?

If so could you let us know how much you would take to not write another one? Good Lord was that a bad book.

D. McEwan said...

Sorry you didn't enjoy MY LUSH LIFE, however, the letters and emails I've gotten from readers around the world who did enjoy it, all ask for more. It's fans include Barry Humphries and Sweet Dick Whittington.

I have a new book coming out this fall. Please feel free to not buy a copy.

DM said...

PS., "Pat H.", or whoever you really are while assuming Miss Heaton's name, since you have actually read MY LUSH LIFE, which would then, and only then, entitle you to an opinion as to it's quality, then could you tell me the name of Chapter 39? You'll find the answer on page 296.

Tallulah Morehead said...

Do I have to defend myself against Little Dougie's insane claim that he wrote my book again here? I wrote every word, and three-quarters of the punctuation of my internationally-noticed, near-award winning autobiography MY LUSH LIFE. All Little Dougie did was sit and take down my words. Dougie is always taking credit for my words, one of his many failings, along with not drinking alcohol (INSANE!), and never giving me one, on the lame excuse of his being gay. Honestly, so were half of my husbands. It didn't stop them, although it often slowed them down considerably.

I can only assume that this "Pat H." person is the sole-surviving Delores Delgado fan.

I know nothing of the acting of this Heaton woman, as I am unable to keep straight all of the hot-women-married-to-unattractive-men on sit-coms, something that only occurs in real life when the husband's income surpasses 7 figures annually.

As for politics, all I can say is that that Franklin Roosevelt is a labor-appeasing Bolshevick.

Tones said...

"You've got yours and I've got mine and everything we all believe is lies, in somebodies eyes..."

Okay, I'm going to go do something productive with my day and prove to myself that I have a life and some dignity now.