Brad Pitt’s Mother Gets Death Threats Over Pro-Romney Letter

This was as predictable as the sun coming up in the morning. When Jane Pitt — mother of famous Hollywood lefty Brad Pitt — wrote a letter to her local newspaper encouraging Christians to support Gov. Mitt Romney for President, the Left was not happy.  WND reports:

The Hollywood Reporter published a story headlined, “Brad Pitt’s mother pens anti-gay, anti-Obama letter to local newspaper.” The New York Daily News went further, penning an article originally titled, “Brad Pitt’s mom unleashes anti-gay, anti-Obama fury in letter.”

She Knows Entertainment reported that Pitt actually “hates Obama, ‘gay’ people.”

These slants on the story, however, are mild compared to comments posted on Twitter.

Editors of the Twitter-scouring news site Twitchy exclaimed sarcastically, “Time for the left’s self-proclaimed arbiters of tolerance to teach her a lesson with their hateful, misogynist slurs and death wishes.”

Twitchy then spotlighted some of the tweets it found.

“Brad Pitt’s mom, die,” wrote Twitter-poster Sandy Kownacka.

A tweet from “I Bleed Gaga” echoed similar sentiments, saying, “Brad Pitt’s mom wrote an anti-gay pro-Romney editorial. Kill the b—-.”

Other comments included, “F— you, brad pitt’s mom, the gay community made your kid a star, you whacko,” and, “Brad Pitt’s mom is a dumb c—.”

Many of the comments told her to commit vulgar sexual acts with the commenter.

Apparently, Brad Pitt doesn’t have this kind of hatred towards his mom, whom he has described as

“She’s very, very loving – very open, genuine, and it’s hilarious because she always gets painted in the tabloids as a she-devil,” the actor said. “There’s not an ounce of malice in her. She wants everyone to be happy.”

Read it all here, and chalk this up to another glimpse into how the Left views “diversity.”  (Fine, as long as we all agree to be liberal.)

    You might also enjoy these Romney-related posts:

About Nancy French

Nancy French is a three time New York Times Best Selling Author.

  • http://soundclick.com/333maxwell chas holman

    If true (and I don’t doubt it) .. this is the reason I ran around the first day it broke on a national level and asked ‘why did the media feel compelled to take this to a national level’?

    I disagree with her basic tone of the letter 100%, but she only wrote a letter to her local newspaper, and we should ALL be able to do that without the national media making a field day out of it just because she was someone that no one much cares about anyway ‘mom’ . (Sorry Brad, I only mean your fans don’t really know you, let alone care for you beyond your stardom.. you do respectable work, I mean no sleight).

    If it was my mum all over the national media I would be livid.. too many nuts out there that don’t need to intentionally be led to hot spot issues that are manufactured for sales and ‘hits’.

  • Pingback: Brad Pitt’s Mom Gets Death Threats for Supporting Romney | Evangelicals for Mitt

  • Basil

    Ok, so a bunch of juveniles write some hateful tweets about Brad Pitt’s mom after she wrote hateful anti-gay article urging support for Romney because he shares her anti-gay views. And from this you generalize a big “liberal conspiracy” to kill Brad Pitt’s mom. So what can we conclude:

    A. You are a hypocrite. You’ve never condemned anti-gay rhetoric (including a fair amount of open incitement to violence) by conservative politicians, or pastors — all of which is much more consequential than random anonymous tweets; and
    B. You are a bomb-thrower. You hyperventilate about Oreo cookies with rainbow filling, and about some malicious tweets because you want to make yourself into a victim. There are real victims — like LGBT teens who get bullied at school or in church, and driven into depression and suicide, or LGBT young adults who are victims of anti-gay violence — like the lesbian couple murdered in Texas –but none of that merits a mention from you because you would rather hyperventilate about Oreo cookies and random tweets; and
    C. See point A.

    • hillplus

      Not sure how being pro traditional marriage is anti gay.

      • DJ

        Exactly. Being pro traditional marriage is not hateful in any way. People who suggest that it is should think and realize they are showing their own hate.

        • Basil

          That is an easy question to answer. She believes that gay and lesbian couples should not have the same legal, social, and financial rights that she enjoys with her husband by virtue of being able to get legally married. Same sex couples are, to her, inferior, and should be discriminated against. She is against equal treatment, under the law, and within society. That is hateful. It does not mesh with that whole Biblical injunction about loving your neighbor as yourself. Last I checked, there was no exception if that neighbors are gay or lesbian.

          You can put lipstick on a pig, but it’s still a pig.

          • Sharon

            It is not reasonable to state Brad Pitt’s mother is not following the Bible because she “doesn’t love her neighbor as herself” since she doesn’t support same sex marriage. The Bible doesn’t support it either since homosexuality is condemned as a sin in both the Old Testament and the New Testament.

  • Pingback: DYSPEPSIA GENERATION » Blog Archive » Brad Pitt’s Mother Gets Death Threats Over Pro-Romney Letter

  • People can be idiots

    Yes,
    I’m talking about the Basils and Hollmans of the world.

    Pitt’s letter was not a “hateful, anti-gay article”, and it had no negative “basic tone”.

    Here’s the letter you dolts:
    http://www.news-leader.com/article/20120703/OPINIONS03/307030043/Election-Casting-ballot-deserves-prayerful-consideration?nclick_check=1

    She simply responded to someone who suggested that people should vote against someone who shares their values because that candidate has different beliefs. The original author went on to state that it shouldn’t be considered the ugly prejudice it is and so forth. (He went on to rail against Romney’s religion but acknowledged Romney shared his views on abortion and homosexuality.)

    This good lady, herself not hateful, could not sit silent and let stand such hateful rhetoric. Her reply was short, polite and diplomatic.

    ” I am also a Christian and differ with the Mormon religion.

    “But I think any Christian should spend much time in prayer before refusing to vote for a family man with high morals, business experience, who is against abortion, and shares Christian conviction concerning homosexuality just because he is a Mormon.”

    She then noted that following the original authors advice of refusing to vote for Romney is a vote for Obama, who is pro-abortion and for same-sex marriage.

    No hate, just stating facts in defending someone against ugly bigotry.

    And then the small minded come along– especially Basil, calling it hate while ironically spewing hatred himself, including calling the author of this article a hypocrit and so forth for simply posting excerpts of an article noting similar reactions of other small minded people, and making accusations that say more about himself than the fantasy assumptions he stated (that happen to be incorrect).

    The lady who posted this article, Nancy French, posted this article wanting to educate people into the mentality and behavior of the left, and those responses to the article both confirm and teach her lesson loud and clear.

    Interesting.

    • Basil

      Let’s take a closer look at Jane Pitt’s letter, shall we:

      First, why does she refer to the President with his middle name, Hussein? Would she refer to George Bush as “George Walker Bush”, or “George Herbert Walker Bush” (depending upon which Bush)? Would she refer to President Clinton as “William Jefferson Clinton” or President Carter as “James Earl Carter”? Probably not. Would she even refer to Mitt Romney as “Willard Mitt Romney”? No, of course not.
      Let’s be honest — she uniquely focuses on the President’s middle name as a way to signify that he is not “one of us”. He has this strange Middle Eastern middle name (more commonly associated with Muslims) and, although he claims to be Christian, he worshipped with that Jeremiah Wright fellow — even though the President quite publicly broke with Reverend Wright in 2008. She is quite obviously of the opinion that even though Mitt is Mormon — which is bad for some unknown reason — he is more Christian that “Hussein” fellow because that Hussein guy thinks it is ok to murder babies and let queers get married. It is an intentionally disrespectful way to refer to the man who is our duly elected President. It’s something John McCain denounced in 2008 in his campaign. It’s juvenile and it marks her as a crank.
      Second, what exactly does she mean by the “Christian conviction concerning homosexuality”? It takes a lot of chutzpah to state there is a unified “Christian conviction”, because a lot Christians have very differing opinion on homosexuals, and many are actually quite accepting and loving of them, just as they are. I think that is probably not her view — perhaps she takes the view of Leviticus, in calling for the death penalty for homosexuals. Or maybe she just thinks they won’t go to heaven because they are “unnatural” or “sinful”. We can’t really tell with precision what she thinks on the topic. What we can logically and easily infer is that she is troubled by the idea of a same-sex couple getting married — which means she believes that gay and lesbian persons are inferior and should legally and socially handicapped in a way that she is not. That is a pretty hateful view of gays.

      • Sharon

        So far you have only ranted by filling in a bunch of blanks on what you think she thinks. Again, there was nothing hateful in her comments, they were respectful and polite, unlike the responses made by others to her letter.

  • Poqui

    The left clamors, “Celebrate Diversity!” until it disagrees with their views. Where is the tolerance for someone’s point of view that differs from yours?

    Unbelievable…

  • http://yahoo Jim

    Brad does not have the testoterone to support his mom who is right. Tells you a lot about Brad and his lack of what is rigth andhas been sucked into the odumbo phylosophy

    • Kristen

      He doesn’t even has the manhood to support his mother’s right to her own opinion, even though he disagrees with her.

    • Kristen

      He doesn’t even has the manhood to support his mother’s right to her own opinion, even though he disagrees with her. He doesn’t even have the manhood to defend her right to her opinion after her life is threatend.

  • naitsirhc

    I work full-time in Hollywood’s liberal enclave. And it has always been my preference, wherever I have worked, to keep my politics very much to myself. Recently, however, a liberal co-worker with whom I normally have cordial genuine conversations discovered quite by chance that I had “liked” EFM on facebook. Smilingly, as if she had at last caught me up for letting my guard down, she announced with a gasp: “Oh! You’re an Obama hater!” And went on to casually imply that I was a racist. The venom and malice Mrs. Pitt experienced was not there. But the assumption that my co-worker had grasped the moral and meaning behind my single click on facebook, struck me. She wasn’t asking me why I felt that way, she announced to me (and to the rest of the office within earshot) what I felt and why. I thought perhaps she was baiting me for more information. But now I think she was simply drawing the inevitable conclusion we see over and over amongst our progressive friends. I feel for Pitt’s mother. May God please bless her and keep her and her family safe from harm.

  • June

    Everything she said about Obama is true.There has been a conserted effort to not mention Obama’s middle name by the press and the Obama white house. No one should be pressured to omit or not do something strictly for his image. Because she does not agree with same sex marriage does not mean she hates gays. What a vile accusation against someone just to promote you cause.

  • June

    Basil and others minutely pick her apart in their light when she simply meant what she wrote. These are actions that become laws. She has a right to her view. She does not agree with Obama on abortion. She does not agree on same sex marriage. It has nothing to do with inferior or not. These are laws that everyone has an opinion on. If you do not agree with the Basil’s of this world then you are racist, homophobe, etc. you do not know what she is facing now. Letters wanting her dead are not simply innocent juvenile pranks. I guarantee you if Basil received several of these he would be concerned. Death threats are just lighthearted pranks to Basil. That says it all. Oh, and Obama stayed under Wright over 20 years raising his children under his racist teachings and only left for political reasons. Most of the hate speech I have seen has come from the left.

    • Basil

      I never challenged Jane Pitt’s right to express her opinions, no matter how illogical, and bigoted they might me. That is her first amendment right as a citizen. And it is my first amendment right to assess her arguments for what they are — narrow-minded, obviously homophobic, and with a barely concealed racist undertone towards the President — the whole “Hussein” schtick is tiresome. When was the last time we talked about Presidents by their middle name? And what is wrong with Hussein as a middle name anyways?

      Denying a group of people, like gays and lesbians, equal protection under the law on the basis of an innate characteristic (like sexual orientation), is by definition an act of bigotry. That is just a fact. The earth is round, and the moon is a big rock that is not made of green cheese. Those are also facts. We can accept or deny them, but denying facts tends to make us look foolish. No amount of spinning, and whining about “religious freedom” is going to change the fact that denying equal treatment is an act of bigotry. We do not live in a theocracy and there is no conceivable reason why religious views of one side should be imposed on others in order to deny equality under the law.

      Here is a summation about why bigotry is never a nice thing (courtesy of the slacktivist blog), no matter how we want to spin it:
      http://www.patheos.com/blogs/slacktivist/2012/06/11/you-cant-deny-people-their-rights-and-be-nice-about-it/

      • http://c5.zedo.com Marilyn Neumann

        Basil has a very small disorder. It’s a tolerance disorder and it’s very small. People with eyes saw Obama in 2008 as someone under the Rev. Wright spell (not only did he sit in his church for 20 years, Basil, he also married BHO and Michelle) and brought his girls to the church. So quit rewriting history and open your eyes. You want Mrs. Pitt to change the definition of marriage. She doesn’t want to rewrite the dictionary like you want to rewrite history so you call her names. So mature and grownup of you. You are misguided (stupid) and I would hate to talk to you in person because you are a blockhead. And I mean that in the most respectful and friendly way I can.

  • rod kelly

    Right on,ms.pitt! u rock on lady!!!


CLOSE | X

HIDE | X