Retroactive justice came to collect Kevin Hart the other day, for making gay jokes years ago on Twitter
NEW YORK (AP) — Just two days after being named host of the Academy Awards, Kevin Hart stepped down following an outcry over past homophobic tweets by the comedian.
Capping a swift and dramatic fallout, Hart wrote on Twitter just after midnight Thursday that he was withdrawing as Oscars host because he didn’t want to be a distraction. “I sincerely apologize to the LGBTQ community for my insensitive words from my past,” wrote Hart.
Hart, who is in Australia for a comedy tour, also tweeted Friday morning: “The ultimate measure of a man is not where he stands in moments of comfort and convenience, but where he stands at times of challenge and controversy. Martin Luther King, Jr.”
Hart’s invocation of MLK suggests he recognizes this all as a contest between the gays and blacks for leadership of the ruling diversity coalition. The gay faction presents itself as diverse, putting forward flamboyant minorities in its propaganda, but its elite is overwhelmingly white (sometimes I think the big LGBTQ push right now is largely a surreptitious way to keep whites and Jews in charge of the coalition of the fringes)
Earlier Thursday evening, the comedian had refused to apologize for tweets that resurfaced after he was announced as Oscars host on Tuesday. In a video on Instagram, Hart said the Academy of Motion Pictures Arts and Sciences gave him an ultimatum: apologize or “we’re going to have to move on and find another host.”
“I chose to pass on the apology,” Hart said. “The reason why I passed is because I’ve addressed this several times.”
Anyone who refuses to apologize has to be commended for it, but I suspect Hart was only too glad to quit while he was behind. Doing the show after grovelling would be like second helping of grovelling–a show we can expect to be heavy on the LGBTQ propaganda. Participating in it after getting smacked down would have been too much humiliation for anyone capable of feeling it. It’s that and more for someone whose audience is disproportionately straight black men.
Hart was there to satisfy the “Oscars so white” hustle but ran afoul of the gay mafia. Now they’ll have a second chance to throw a sop to the “me too” shakedown. But a female host will likely be a disaster. Of course the Academy can be reassured by the fact it won’t be seen because no one watches the show any more
It’s not the first time an Oscars host has been derailed by anti-gay remarks. Ahead of the 2012 Academy Awards, producer Brett Ratner, who had been paired with host Eddie Murphy, resigned days after using a gay slur at a film screening. Murphy soon after exited, as well.
That year, a tried-and-true Oscars veteran — Billy Crystal — jumped in to save the show, hosting for his eighth time. This time, speculation has already been rampant that few in Hollywood want the gig, for which few win glowing reviews.
Oh, I suspect there’ll be many “glowing reviews” for various performers in the near future–glowing craters marking careers nuked by pc outrages.
Host of the Oscars becoming the honor no one wants is sweet irony. You can expect the scrutiny normally reserved for a Supreme Court nominee, an army of volunteer censors combing through your past. It’s getting harder to cast this part. I imagine the various creative ways people come up with to turn down the job.
They seemed to have done well with the Kevin Hart pick too, finding someone who satisfied the diversity demand and is actually somewhat talented. That just got that much harder.
Of course there’ll always be lesser artists dying for the job. Via Steve Sailer, here’s my pick. Go long, Academy:
.@HannahGadsby kicks off #WomenInEntertainment with a powerful speech. “What happens when only good men get to draw the line?” pic.twitter.com/A7Nc0fSSOq
— Hollywood Reporter (@THR) December 5, 2018
Notice how miserable the audience of women (all outfitted to meet the demands of the thirsty male gaze, I’ll add) look until that priceless finish when a young woman sees herself on a monitor (or something). Behind her another claps without enthusiasm, as grim-faced as her delighted friend was a moment before, before being distracted (by her own image, maybe) and falling out of character.
We are fated to navigate between the feminine extremes of inconsolable resentment and unquenchable vanity represented here:
If the revolution won’t be led by the sexually frustrated perhaps it will be led by the comedically frustrated.