Or Horowitz, or, for that matter, Savage.
Unfortunate ‘Son of Sam’ connotation.
Why are you comparing David Mamet to a serial killer?
Bush got us into Iraq, JFK into Vietnam. Bush stole the election in Florida; Kennedy stole his in Chicago. Bush outed a CIA agent; Kennedy left hundreds of them to die in the surf at the Bay of Pigs. Bush lied about his military service; Kennedy accepted a Pulitzer Prize for a book written by Ted Sorenson. Bush was in bed with the Saudis, Kennedy with the Mafia. Oh.
And Mamet never even killed total strangers in a serial fashion.
Its a different Berkowitz ...Daniel?
Mamet—someone who may possible be able to fill the bery large shoes of William F. Buckley!
If ever an admin correction was needed - this is it!
You really should have the original title restored. It is much more descriptive of the content of this interesting article.
Oh no, some dog told him to become a conservative.
The Son of Sam?
What’s he got to do with it?
Given the tenor of this article, I would strongly suggest that Mr. Mamet go read the book of Romans. His heart is leading him in the right direction and is talking to him. I will pray he listens, ever closer. Even if he’s read Romans before, given his new insights, I think he may now find some meaning he never imagined was there.
Hardly on par with Horowitz’s conversion; at least not yet. Mamet seems to have only arrived at the everybody-does-it stage of disillusionment with the left. He apparently still buys into a lot of the lies told by the left about Bush and his administration.
He can just forget about winning anymore awards for the near future.
Although Mamet's artistic reputation is secure and its probably safe to assume he's quite wealthy, to jettison core liberal PC political beliefs with clarity of thought in a very public way is more than unusual and bold, it's downright brave. He certainly will be vilified by the left. I'm sure Mamet realizes that - and doesn't care. Good for him. Maybe we'll see him on Foxnews someday debating public policy with some liberal hack like Alan Colmes.
While most of us can quibble with some of Mamet's statements, especially his comparisons between Presidents Kennedy and Bush, which assume every leftwing canard ever thrown at President Bush is factual. Mamet's conclusion - that human needs, the will to survive and prosper that the free-market serves, easily prevail over liberal Utopian fantasies manifested as public policy that either fail utterly (The War on Poverty) or make matters worse (Affirmative Action) - is basically sound.
To this, I say: 'Welcome home, Mr. Mamet. What took you so long?'
All his former suckups are gonna be in a tizzy.