Home
Archive
Columnists
Video
Blogs
Discuss
About
Search
Donate
Advertise
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Register to Vote: Rock the Vote, powered by Working Assets Wireless
Advertisement
  • AlterNetYour turn

Support AlterNet
Do you value the information you're getting from AlterNet? Please show your support with a tax-deductible donation.


Feedback
Tell us how we're doing.

Who Hollywood Backs (With Their Wallets) in 2008

By Katherine Thomson, Huffington Post. Posted August 7, 2007.


Find out which candidates Hollywood's top names are throwing their dollars behind.
Advertisement

Despite some high profile fundraisers for the big three Democratic candidates in recent months, many of Hollywood's biggest names and most political families have yet to give big in the presidential race.

The Sheen/Estevez clan, Martin, Charlie and Emilio, all turn up empty, ditto all four Baldwin brothers and the Gyllenhaals. Goldie Hawn, Kurt Russell and Kate Hudson are also yet to commit.

But Universal chief Ron Meyer, daughter Jennifer and her fiance and baby-daddy Tobey Maguire have all cut big checks for Democrats. Ron has given $3,300 to Obama, $2300 to Dodd, $2300 to Clinton and $1000 to both Edwards and Richardson. Tobey has used his profit points to give Obama $2300 and Clinton $4600, while Jennifer has given $2300 to Obama.

The outspoken Arquettes also turn up near empty, Rosanna gave $2300 to Obama, but Patricia, Alexis and David have given nothing. David's wife Courtney Cox Arquette also shows no donations. In fact, the only one of the six "Friends" who has given is Jennifer Aniston, and she gave $2300 to Obama.

Many stars turn up nothing thus far, from Julia Roberts, Gwyneth Paltrow, Jennifer Garner, Drew Barrymore and Angelina Jolie, to Brad Pitt, Johnny Depp, Robert De Niro, Matt Damon and Ben Affleck. But, George Clooney has given $2300 to Obama, and Clooney, De Niro and Pitt's agent, CAA's Bryan Lourd, has also given $2300 to Obama.

And despite living in Bermuda most of the year, Michael Douglas has given big: $4600 each to Clinton, Obama, Richardson and Dodd. John Edwards, however, got nothing from Douglas.

Hollywood heavy Steven Spielberg has given widely. After cohosting an event for Obama in February, and endorsing Clinton in June, the director has given $2300 to Obama, Clinton, Edwards and Richardson.

Director Brett Ratner, who hosted a high-profile event for Clinton, has given her $4600, and Edwards $4600, as well. But his "Rush Hour" star Chris Tucker shows up with nothing and his "X-Men 3" leading lady Halle Berry has given only to Obama, to the tune of $2300.

And who do Scientologists support? It's hard to tell. Tom Cruise, John Travolta, Kelly Preston, Giovanni Ribisi, Jenna Elfman, Kirstie Alley, Nancy Cartwright, Juliette Lewis, Leah Remini, and Lisa Marie Presley all turn up nothing. One who did, "Crash" writer/director Paul Haggis, has given $2100 to Dennis Kucinich.

The followers of Kabbalah have also been tight with campaign donations. Demi Moore, Ashton Kutcher, Madonna, Roseanne Barr and Sandra Bernhard gave nothing. Madonna's baby-daddy Carlos Leon also turns up empty. One follower who did give was Donald Trump's second wife. Marla Maples has given $2000 to Clinton. The Kabbalah Centre's founder and spiritual leader Philip Berg also has yet to give.

Elsewhere, Barbra Streisand has covered her bases and given $2300 to Obama, Edwards and Clinton. Don Henley topped that with $4600 to Clinton and Obama. Jon Bon Jovi (as John Bongiovi) and Bruce Springsteen have given nothing so far, but Paul Simon has given $4600 to Dodd.

Younger stars like Lindsay Lohan, Mischa Barton, Britney Spears, and Justin Timberlake have given nothing, either. And like old times, all of 'N Sync followed Timberlake's lead, with none of the other four guys donating.

On the Republican side, Kelsey Grammer shows up with a $2300 donation to Giuliani, but his fellow conservative and upcoming sitcom costar Patricia Heaton turns up nothing.

The hip-hop community has also been dormant. Shawn "Jay-Z" Carter, Sean "Diddy" Combs, Damon Dash, Russell Simmons, Marshall "Eminem" Mathers, Christopher "Ludacris" Bridges and Curtis "50 Cent" Jackson show nothing.

Less anyone forget, it was Combs who spearheaded Citizen Change's "Vote or Die" campaign during the 2004 presidential campaign. Simmons, meanwhile, has been a vocal proponent of John Edwards in the past. On July 24, 2006, Simmons took Edwards with him to an evening class at Union Square's Jivamukti Yoga, got photographed with him outside of the class, and spoke to the New York Daily News about the occasion. Apparently those downward dogs just weren't enough.


Digg!

See more stories tagged with: hollywood, politics, election08

Liked this story? Get top stories in your inbox each week from AlterNet! Sign up now »


Advertisement

 

Comments Turn comments off sitewide Give us feedback »
Comments closed.
The comments for this story have been closed. Thank you to everyone who participated.
View:
All that money would be better spent bring the populist progressive ideology to LIFE and ACTION !
Posted by: maxpayne on Aug 7, 2007 12:45 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
If Hollywood is just going to give millions to candidates just to make a show, it's a direct waste of the consumer's money.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Surprise!!!
Posted by: Conservasaurus on Aug 7, 2007 5:07 AM   
Current rating: 1    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Amazing, the self absorbed, super rich, who add little to society except stories to sell "rag mag's" support the dem's..


"lets make a few donations before we jet off to a private island where we can prepare for our cruise next month"" - yes "follywood" types they are in tune with real issues!!!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Surprise!!! Posted by: dangerouslysane
» RE: Surprise!!! Posted by: Conservasaurus
» RE: Surprise!!! Posted by: Doubtom
What about whom the electorate supports?
Posted by: american on Aug 7, 2007 5:28 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Hollywoods "top" names? Reboot!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

??????????
Posted by: wireup on Aug 7, 2007 5:35 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Who gives a damn?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Agreed Posted by: DCBeltway
» RE: ?????????? - Ditto! Posted by: Aimleft
Support?
Posted by: alphakat on Aug 7, 2007 6:38 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
When you give to multiple candidates, which many of these people have done, it doesn't seem you're voting your conscience so much as covering your bases.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

UniversalHealthCare4All
Posted by: UniversalHealthCare4All on Aug 7, 2007 7:37 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
OK, here we have famous (and rich) actors, directors, film execs "diggin' deep" into their wallets to shell out between $1000 and $5000 in support of XYZ presidential candidate. The low end could be likened to a rip roarin' night out for six at a Hollywood martini bar and the top of the range possibly a weekend getaway for two--Hollywood-style--to "Paradise Island" or some dude ranch in Montana. Catch my drift? What you and I average US citizen might see as alot of popcorn and movie tickets ($1000-$5000) is no more than a few coins in the Salvation Army bellringer's bucket for Mr./Ms. Hollywood. (What is the average "salary" for a film star or director per movie? Millions I'm sure.)

Conclusion: The story's headline pulled me in with the expectation that I would be reading about some BIG show of financial force by my favorite screen actors/directors. I'm not impressed.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: UniversalHealthCare4All Posted by: jbur816
They don't support Ron Paul because he speaks the truth to America...
Posted by: poppop_schell on Aug 7, 2007 7:46 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
and Hollywood is all show and publicity. Yes, there are a few real principled people but most simply "go along with the politically correct crowd."

ronpaul2008.com

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» nonsense Posted by: Iconoclast421
» RE: nonsense Posted by: Doubtom
Meanwhile:
Posted by: MadFlacc on Aug 7, 2007 7:44 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Don Cheadle is trying to organize people to do something about Darfur, using the Ocean's 13 premiere parties and any other public forum he can to bring public attention to the atrocities going on in Sudan.

Wouldn't that make a more interesting, more relevant and more progressive article than how much money a small list of celebrities have contributed to various political campaigns?

How is this article relevant to anything? Why would an honest progressive journalist bother documenting this at all?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Meanwhile: Posted by: Conservasaurus
» RE: Meanwhile in Giuliani's fantasyland Posted by: Conservasaurus
» RE: Meanwhile: Posted by: Doubtom
» RE: Meanwhile: Posted by: MadFlacc
» RE: Meanwhile: Posted by: Doubtom
» RE: Meanwhile: Posted by: Conservasaurus
» RE: Meanwhile: Posted by: Doubtom
» Inconsistency Posted by: MadFlacc
» RE: Inconsistency Posted by: Doubtom
» RE: Meanwhile: Posted by: Conservasaurus
» Those things sound LIBERAL? Posted by: Ellie1
Significance of the $2300 donation.
Posted by: casa on Aug 7, 2007 9:22 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Doe's anyone know why exactly so many of the donations were $2300 or $4600? Must be a tax thing, right?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Why do we care?
Posted by: vertical on Aug 7, 2007 1:53 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Why do we care what Hollywood morons give money to. An Idiot can act. In fact, I bet thewre are more people on this country who can act than be carpenters. Actors like Charlie Sheen and Cameron Diaz are high school drop out. These people don't desreve our patronage.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Why do we care? Posted by: UniversalHealthCare4All
drmagal53
Posted by: drmagal53 on Aug 7, 2007 2:04 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
It is very interesting to me that many of the folks who have given have spread out their contributions and have kept the amounts even. I wonder why this is so.

I wonder if it is because, like myself, I have not yet heard much coming from any of the DEMS. The front runners are all so over-handled and over-advised that none of them are really asking good questions OR answering the good questions.

It's just a big show. To which I say, oh shit. More of the same. Kucinich and Paul and the other back runners are the ones to listen to because they are trying to air ideas on big, substantial and complex issues. Abortion and gays are not important issues compared to the Iraq war, health care, foreign affairs, our economy, our loss of free press, etc.

But the truth tellers are being ignored. And the front runners are being handled. Edwards seems to be the most authentic, the one speaking his truly held beliefs, but who knows? It's the game we've bought and paid for.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Francis
Posted by: Francis on Aug 7, 2007 3:12 PM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Hollywood "celebrities" have a right to their opinions as do we all. We have a right to ignore them. Those who contribute to both candidates in a race are simply businessnmen covering their backsides so that they can shift with the wind as personal interest dictates. The Jewish lobby did that for decades and it certainly worked for them.

I would like to understand the economics of cigarette promotion by the movie makers. particularly inasmuch as they do not hesitate to take bows for their righteousness and feigned populism. Do the actors understand that tobacco interests are behind all the cigarette smoking they do in the movies? Do they get paid extra for their contribution? I would truly like to know. But in the meantime, let them pretend to care about humanity. They are, after all, pretenders by trade.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Yawn
Posted by: opeluboy on Aug 7, 2007 7:54 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Think I'll go read the one about pooping yourself skinny.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Let's go a different way
Posted by: jeffrey7 on Aug 8, 2007 9:31 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Well here we are. Still fighting the Global War on Terror and still being bombed by our media in the Global Psychological War of Terror. Have you had enough yet? I damn sure have. I know several million of you are too. Those of us old enough to remember 'living it', rightly compare the current action with Vietnam.Both were illegal,both against former 'Friends'. both resulted in a big uptick in the World opiate trade, both are making big bucks for the Govt/Industrial/Defense Complex. The very people that think of ALL OF US AS EXPENDABLE!!!
It's high time for a change. One we can actually do. One that can truly effect future generations in the best possible way. For sure the first thing is to abolish all military actions NOW. Then dismantle the offensive capacity of the military.Write pacts of Non-Aggression with appendixes that include total disarmament. As we beging the disarmament of the G-8, the rest of the nations will want to join the soildarity of nations that Trade fairly,operate openly in the Spirit of co-operation and not confrontation.
We made our enemies,we can unmake them. We've been playing a game of 'favorites'. It did'nt work in the schoolyard,it sure as hell does'nt make it as foriegn policy. It's time to 'Think Outside the System'.
The current model of the system works like this,both foriegn and domestic..." I will control you, You may Love me,But I Will Control You! You may Hate me,but, I Will Control You! You may support me,but I Will Control You! You may Fear me, but I Will Control You! If you don't Love me or Hate me or Suppot me or Fear me, I WILL STILL CONTROL YOU!!!" Jesus Christ, how can you call this a 'democracy'? I think I can say for more than a few people that this isn't the 'packaged and approved for human indoctrination' vision of America we're supposed to be all flag waiving about. I'm offended by the way this system treats it's neighbor Nations and our own People.
We really do have to power to make things different, better, to truly 'advance' our society and our Civilization as a whole. We can end the War. Tyranny survives when brave People of Vision give in to complacancy and call it Freedom.

All we need to do is THINK OUTSIDE the SYSTEM

Draft Jeffrey7 for Prez. it's the only vote that counts

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Barb Gantt
Posted by: ganttbarb on Aug 11, 2007 4:27 PM   
Current rating: 1    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
By Barb Gantt

August 10, 2007 1:20 PM | Link to this

I support Tom Tancredo on bombing Mecca and Medina and on illegal immigration enforcement.

Moderate Muslims HAVE to make a stand and HAVE to become vocal as to their aborrence against the radical interpretation of the Koran. Otherwise, ALL Muslims will go down together in this “War against Terrorism”. Moderate Muslims have to decide what their interpretation of the Koran means. Moderate Muslims have to make a choice for democracy and deplomacy or for their Muslim tribal connections. This is the problem. Muslims have to make a choice.

By Barbara

August 10, 2007 2:05 PM | Link to this

Melanie Phillips Author from Britain speaks in the US to try and help America not make the same mistakes as England. The erosion of nationhood is caused by too much tolerance for immigrants that want to change America and make America morph to their ethnicity. Are you Mexican American? Or, are you American Mexican? Are you Muslim American? Or, are you American Muslim?

America’s freedom has to make some complex decisions of protectionism. The US has to quarantine radical Muslim. America can not become Islamic nor Hispanic. America’s founding was for freedom for all. And now America has to make serious choices against immigrants that do not want to assimilate.

This is why moderate Muslims have to make a choice as to radical Koran interpretation or moderate Koran interpretation. Right now Muslims want to sit on their ethnic fence at the same time they are immigrating to the US. Same as Hispanic immigrants that want to protest in the streets carrying Mexican flags.

Britain made that mistake of being too liberal with immigrant’s rights. America should not become fascist. America should become smarter.

By Barb Gantt

August 11, 2007 6:59 PM | Link to this

Do you Americans really believe the U.S. can survive spending 30 Billion a month for 7 years? Should China and Japan own the U.S. through all the foreign debt extensions? Doesn’t anyone out there in America remember the depression?….H E L L O….

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]