August 19, 2013, - 4:12 pm

EXCLUSIVE: Real-Life Butler Behind Oprah Movie Was Active Republican, Despite Portrayal Otherwise

By Debbie Schlussel

As I told you on Friday, much of the depiction of the “inspired by a true story” Black White House butler in “Lee Daniels’ The Butler,” is complete fiction (read my review). And, now, DebbieSchlussel.com has exclusively learned that Eugene Allen, the butler, on whose life the story was hardly based, was a Republican activist, and NOT the anti-Reagan, anti-Republican man portrayed in this movie. Not even close. As I noted in my review, the movie shows fictional butler “Cecil Gaines” finally quitting the White House in disgust over what he sees as Ronald Reagan’s lack of regard for Blacks’ civil rights, and coming around to his fictional Black Panther son’s radical point of view.

REAL “The Butler” Eugene Allen . . .

eugeneallengopelephant

FAKE “Lee Daniels’ The Butler” . . .

oprahbutlerthebutler

But that was not the case in reality–a reality that apparently didn’t fit conveniently with the agenda of the filmmakers, so they just lied about it. (Yes, Allen did attend Barack Obama’s Inauguration, but that doesn’t mean he wasn’t a Republican before that.) A reader, whose identity I’ve agreed to keep anonymous,

Ms. Schlussel,

After moving to DC at the end of 2001 with my wife with no connections, we went to a local DC republican committee meeting. A Republican meeting at it’s lowest, neighborhood, grassroots level. Not an RNC [DS: Republican National Committee] meeting, although it was in DC. There we introduced to Eugene Allen and of course I was amazed the fact that he had served during so many administrations, which is why I remember this introduction.






So, if he wasn’t Republican, than why was he there? I can’t easily find anything about this or any party affiliation except that it was expected he voted for the current president. . . . Perhaps its inconvenient that he didn’t fit a storyline. He would have known what is in the hearts of the presidents while choosing his affiliation.

It was a DCGOP meeting where we met him. One of those brushes with history that is hard to forget. (I was in DC until 2007)

I think it’s pretty obvious why Allen was there. You don’t go to boring local Republican meetings, especially in the People’s Republic of Washington, DC, unless you are a hardcore activist Republican (or a mainstream media reporter looking for dirt, which doesn’t fit the Allen profile). To attend local Republican meetings in Washington, DC, you really have to be a staunch GOPer because the District is overwhelmingly Democrat, and the Republicans never win anything. Ever.

As you probably know by now, “Lee Daniels’ The Lecture, er . . . The Butler,” was number one at the box office this past weekend. But that’s because it debuted in August, Hollywood’s pet cemetery for bad movies, where it sends cinematic crap to die a quick death. The movie wouldn’t have fared well against the major summer blockbusters.

And it would have been a whole lot more interesting and less tedious, had they told the truth about Allen–that he didn’t have a Black Panther son, that his son never died in Vietnam, and that he was a Republican activist devoted enough to go to local DC meetings–rather than the self-righteous fairy tales of the Oprah crowd.

But, hey, who needs the truth, when you have Hollywood liberalism, instead? Right?

The Brothers Grimm would be proud.

Related Posts with Thumbnails
Print Friendly



Tags: , , , , , , ,

34 Responses

Ain’t no spin like a Hollywood spin. Not surprised. At this rate its only a matter of time till we see “The Brothers Tsarneav – an All-American Circus act”

Not Ovenready on August 19, 2013 at 4:22 pm

The movie was made by the dirty leftist, racist hands of Oprah Winfrey.

Bob on August 19, 2013 at 4:25 pm

I despise Oprah. If I saw her choking on a chicken bone at a restaurant, I’d offer her another piece of chicken.

DS_ROCKS! on August 19, 2013 at 4:28 pm

It would have been a more interesting story. Instead, you get a movie that could have been made a quarter of a century ago. Debbie is quite right in pointing out that only a hardcore activist would attend a local Republican Party event in Washington D.C.

Worry on August 19, 2013 at 4:48 pm

I guess we are being plagued by a sequence…notwithstanding Gerald, first we were subjected to a movie about maids (The Help), now a butler, will a porter be next and then a sharecropper? There is really an element of racism involved here. Why not a movie about Booker T. Washington or Ralph Bunche, who in spite of his liberal leanings was a good role model, overall.

But no, after they finish with the sharecroppers, porters, domestics, etc., they will make a movie about the disloyal Communist traitor Paul Robeson.

Little Al on August 19, 2013 at 5:03 pm

Although Bunche might not be the best, since he did have Communist leanings (to say the least) for some years. Perhaps we will find out, after all, that he was a secret Communist.

Little Al on August 19, 2013 at 5:12 pm

And ‘inspired’ by a true story? I guess the meaning of the word ‘inspired’ has expanded since I went to school.

Little Al on August 19, 2013 at 5:16 pm

The Dirty Bitch does know how to get the media’s attention. I am paying attention to TWO aspects of that fraud DOprah regarding this crap movie.

I’m annoyed it was number one because it means a bunch of know-nothings went and were moved by a FAKE story and yet have more excuses to feel victimized as Blacks. It’s destructive in all the worst ways. In 2013 this crappy film will keep low-info Blacks and non-independent thinking Blacks stuck on the White Libtard Plantation. I would laugh at it if it wasn’t so sad and destructive.

#2~Let’s keep our eyes on the fraud Dirty Bitch Winfrey. She pulled a similar stunt back in 2005 to promote the “Crash” movie (not the pervo one with James Spader…) with a FRENCH store…I believe Hermes. How they wouldn’t let her shop because she’s Black. Sound familiar???

Please remember #2 with Kitty Kelley’s tell-all on her. THAT is the book to have if you wanna find out some TRUTHS about DOprah. DBW was pretty successful at tamping down interest in that book because of her amount of power and control but that does not mean that it wasn’t worthwhile to read for kicks and giggles (and a bit of the truth). The last few years I find the most interesting books and blogs to read are the ones that are blacklisted by mainstream bores.

Dirty Bitch Winfrey is an absolute FRAUD. Many of us saw thru’ her in the 80s. If you haven’t by now you’re a real, dopey brain-box. So sad, too bad.

I love the true story of the REAL Butler. He sounds like a swell guy and a real independent thinker. There is a paucity of his sort today. DOprah is the zeitgeist and that’s pretty shameful.

(I never liked Rae-Dawn Chong but she let loose on DBW recently but then had to apologize. You know when you hafta grovel to the Harpo Monster that you’re speakin’ the truth…annoying Libtard or NOT. But no one cares about RDC anymore so she got spanked and got placed back on the shelf.)

Skunky on August 19, 2013 at 5:41 pm

A Billion Dollars can buy much entertainment creation, but can it buy the TRUTH?

Listen:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gzcddec5cug

“No greater injury can be done to any youth than to let him feel that because he belongs to this or that race he will be advanced in life regardless of his own merits or efforts.”

Booker T. Washington
(http://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/authors
/b/booker_t_washington.html)

Oprah should have known better and heeded her predecessors in the struggle because she is a product of her individual efforts to succeed. Will she now become a part of the “industry”?

Dennis on August 19, 2013 at 5:49 pm

Why bother rewriting history people will never bother reading.
Just make a stupid history drama about things that never happened.
Only somebody unsympathetic to the issue of discrimination would bother pointing out the facts anyway, right?
Nobody wants to be a party pooper but there are diminishing returns here eventually.
The film industry has already demonstrated that they don’t really care about that though.

Frankz on August 19, 2013 at 5:59 pm

YEPRAH!! Just a HARPEY spelled backwards. I cannot abide that female… I refuse to call her a LADY!

It is just ME AGAIN on August 19, 2013 at 6:00 pm

I am not going to see this movie, but if the butler was coming around to the Black Panthers, I wonder if the film discusses the Panthers’ killing of police officers. Was that something the butler admired in the movie?

Little Al on August 19, 2013 at 8:18 pm

Washington and Hollywood Insiders wonder why they’re NOT TRUSTED!!!! Neither Group of Elites can ever get the Truth right. They always have to have their “Spin” put into the context of Movies that they initiate and support. I have a great deal of respect for Forest Whitaker as an Actor, but I’m NOT going to see this Movie nor buy it when it comes out on DVD! That and the recent news about Oprah Winfrey’s supposed Racial confrontation in Switzerland. I’ve pretty much had enough of her Racial bigotry to last me a lifetime!!!!

Raymond59 on August 20, 2013 at 12:31 am

The only real question is, will it make money? Only fools go to movies looking for truth.

Which is a great pity because the truth can be mucho more entertaining and enlightening than the fecal matter hollywood disgorges.

Nir Leiu on August 20, 2013 at 1:22 am

Everyone should boycott her TV channel OWN. Refuse to watch it, refuse to subscribe to it. Cancel her magazine, stop buying anything that has to do with her. Write the newspaper, you and your friends. Enough letters going to the editor will get their attention and they’ll print some of them. Use your voice, use your techy toys. Use Facebook, let it be known that The Butler is fiction and they are passing it off as non-fiction. I have disliked that woman for years, back before she started with Dr. Phil. That’s another, boycott him because of his association with her. It can be done, hit her where it counts. She may have lots of money, but when she doesn’t have it coming in, she will hurt.

JABuchanjx on August 20, 2013 at 4:02 am

What’s new? Hollywierd rewrites history, just like the gubmint (NEA) and media.

Lou on August 20, 2013 at 9:42 am

@Little Al:

“I guess we are being plagued by a sequence…notwithstanding Gerald”

Huh? Come again?

In any case, nothing wrong with making movies about butlers and maids. Why? Because there is nothing wrong with BEING a butler or a maid. It is good, honest hard work. This is from a liberal site, but even it talks about how Hollywood trashes blue collar work and the people who do it:
http://www.theatlantic.com/entertainment/archive/2013/08/you-can-do-em-anything-em-must-every-kids-movie-reinforce-the-cult-of-self-esteem/278596/
Yes, maids and butlers were disproportionately black, but that was a class thing, not a race thing. (I won’t go into the circular “race/class” stuff, so let’s just leave it at that.) The folks who point this out trying to make it a race thing are really using class as a substitute for racism, and in the process ignoring actual racism issues. (Which was a tactic of the civil rights movement from the very beginning. The civil rights movement was a communist subversive movement and not actually about fighting racism.) So what are they going to do, get rid of class distinctions so there won’t be maids or butlers of any color anymore? How are they going to accomplish this? By getting rid of all rich people? Or by passing “living wage” laws so that all maids and butlers must make $80,000 a year? Or maybe they just have a problem with black maids and butlers. OK … so replacing them with white maids and butlers is better how? Having rich black people hiring white maids and butlers, what does that do for society? It is total nonsense. Foolishness that is completely removed from reality. The truth is that in Eugene Allen’s time, 1950s America, being a maid or a butler for a wealthy person (no matter that person’s race) was a good job for a black person to have and people were glad to get it. If you were a family person – like Allen – and had kids, nephews/nieces etc. the “evil rich white people” would help your kids out, would help them get into college, get jobs, refer them for opportunities, etc. So not only was it preferable to the “hard labor” jobs (you got to work INSIDE instead of out in the fields or in some pre-workplace safety laws factory) but it was a way to provide an opportunity for your family, a leg up, if you worked hard and played your cards right (excuse me, if you sold out and became an Uncle Tom for the man). I recall an article in the Augusta, Georgia (the place of the Master’s golf tournament) about the decline in black golfers on the PGA tour. The reason? Folks like the people who made this movie began discouraging blacks from working as caddies for rich white people, claiming that it was stereotypical, racist and demeaning. Problem: not only do you make a ton of money working as a caddy at a golf club, but IT IS ALSO THE BEST WAY TO LEARN TO PLAY GOLF IF YOU ARE NOT RICH ENOUGH TO BE ABLE TO AFFORD YOUR OWN GOLF EQUIPMENT AND MEMBERSHIP AT A CLUB. Most of the black golf pros were former caddies, and now that being a caddy is now equated with being a race traitor, the number of blacks on the PGA Tour has plummeted even in the post-Tiger Woods era. Gee, who would have thought that actual hard work is more effective than Nike advertising campaigns and media publicity at producing highly skilled, highly paid professionals? Shocker!

As for Ralph Bunche, I don’t think that he was a pinko traitor commie, because he worked for the CIA (or at least the CIA’s predecessor). Bunche was a leftist, but not all leftists are socialists and communists. However, Bunche’s liberal beliefs did cause him to run in circles frequented by socialists and communists. Because of this he was investigated by McCarthy types during the 1950s. (I am one of the rare people who believes that McCarthy and the HUAC did more good than harm by the way.) However, the HUAC cleared Bunche. As discrediting Bunche would have struck a powerful blow against the civil rights movement (which was filled to the brim with communists) they would have been glad to nail him had there been any reason to, so he was probably clean. So chances are that Bunche was no MLK (Marxist) or Obama (Marxist and … er, other stuff).

Gerald on August 20, 2013 at 9:47 am

Sorry guys, while Oprah Winfrey makes for an easy scapegoat, she is not behind this movie. Lee Daniels is the director and producer. More important, Danny Strong wrote the script. He is the guy who did the lefty “Recount” and “Game Change.”

The story of the development of this movie is here:
http://www.latimes.com/entertainment/movies/moviesnow/la-et-mn-backstage-butler-20130815,0,4894460.story

Winfrey was just an actress. Nothing more. Lee Daniels explained why: ” Daniels said he was reluctant to ask the media mogul to help bankroll the production. “Because I wouldn’t have been able to direct her,” the director said. “I’m sure she would have given it to me. But she would have been like the boss. She was the employee, not the boss.”

So, blame on the hatchet job done on the legacy of this decent man, American history and the truth itself pretty much begins with Danny Strong. Though Lee Daniels did have the ability to change the script, as directors do. Daniels didn’t because it fit his own worldview. Case in point: depicting Eugene Allen’s son as having died in Viet Nam. In real life, Charles Allen, Eugene Allen’s son, had 5 kids. Well homosexual men like Daniels can’t have kids, remember? So fighting to make script changes over that point wouldn’t have been on his agenda. And yes, Daniels is a far-left anti-American type. I remember reading in the L.A. Times a few years ago about his going to Europe to accept some award and in his acceptance speech he basically disowned America.

Don’t get me wrong. I despise Oprah and ever have since being pretty much forced to watch her male-bashing Christian mocking fest every day because it was on every channel and we didn’t have cable. Ugh. The woman is despicable for reasons too many to name. But her only blame is agreeing to act in this movie (she did so because she is social friends with Daniels, as she prefers the company of homosexuals to straight men) and if Oprah had said no then Daniels would have just gotten Angela Bassett or someone else to do it.

Gerald on August 20, 2013 at 10:12 am

    Hee-hee Gerald. You so funny! I get it now.

    We prolly agree more than disagree on your “issues” with homosexuals (and I may disagree in passion on your distaste which has been hangin’ out as of late) but I am still curious why you don’t afford homosexuals the same achilles heel you afford your self with your sensitivities????

    Yeah, I’m not a RDC fan. Just one of those things where you just don’t like the person for any good reason. It happens. No big reason but I do agree with you on her ex-hubby. Never liked him either.

    Skunky on August 20, 2013 at 11:29 am

      Skunky, you must understand something. The little negro Gerald is mad at me for clobbering him when he attacked JEG with no prov(as I recall). You will recall that when he basically ignored my points, I told him that I would not defend him in the future and that someone who does not address follow-ups to Up to that time he was gay-positive here. But as our friend has no integrity, he decided on this new course after that event.

      As for his current dumb attacks, they are, well, dumb. For example:

      Though Lee Daniels did have the ability to change the script, as directors do. Daniels didn’t because it fit his own worldview. Case in point: depicting Eugene Allen’s son as having died in Viet Nam. In real life, Charles Allen, Eugene Allen’s son, had 5 kids. Well homosexual men like Daniels can’t have kids, remember? So fighting to make script changes over that point wouldn’t have been on his agenda.

      I mean, huh? Leaving aside the obvious–that in Hollywood lots o’ homosexuals have kids–how could this be relevant to the matter at hand? It isn’t. But our favorite negro has his petty hatreds and his pet sensitivities.

      skzion on August 20, 2013 at 5:17 pm

        “when he attacked JEG with no prov(as I recall).”

        should be:

        “when he attacked JEG (as I recall) with no provocation.”

        skzion on August 20, 2013 at 5:18 pm

        (Skunky, sorry for my bad edits. While you will be able to figure out what I meant, I’ve decided just to replace the comment.)

        Skunky, you must understand something. The little negro Gerald is mad at me for clobbering him when he attacked JEG without provocation. You will recall that when he basically ignored my points, I told him that I would not defend him in the future and that someone who does not address challenges to his arguments is just a troll. Up to that time, Gerald was fairly gay-positive here. But as our friend has no integrity, he decided on this new course after that event.

        As for his current dumb attacks, they are, well, dumb. For example:

        Though Lee Daniels did have the ability to change the script, as directors do. Daniels didn’t because it fit his own worldview. Case in point: depicting Eugene Allen’s son as having died in Viet Nam. In real life, Charles Allen, Eugene Allen’s son, had 5 kids. Well homosexual men like Daniels can’t have kids, remember? So fighting to make script changes over that point wouldn’t have been on his agenda.

        I mean, huh? Leaving aside the obvious–that in Hollywood lots o’ homosexuals have kids–how could this be relevant to the matter at hand? It isn’t. But our favorite negro has his petty hatreds and his pet sensitivities.

        skzion on August 20, 2013 at 5:21 pm

          Indeed, Skzion.

          Pet Hates & petty sensitivities don’t mix well. If he’s gonna be all sensitive on race issues he needs to afford all others (namely gays, which has been germane to his bugaboos lately) their sensitivities too.

          That’s why not being honest can cause quite the problem when trying to defend or detest a certain demographic.

          Skunky on August 20, 2013 at 7:56 pm

@Skunky:

What do you have against Rae Dawn Chong? Please don’t tell me that one of my favorite actresses from the 1980s did something immoral or something. Don’t tell me that you are holding her marriage to C. Thomas Howell against her!!!

Gerald on August 20, 2013 at 10:16 am

A pretty good article on “The Butler” by the Hoover Institution. The most inflammatory scene in the movie – the rape of the butler’s mother and murder of his father – was totally fiction. As was the claim that the butler was taken in by the Vanessa Redgrave character in order to break/dehumanize him and make him servile. The article also makes it clear that the script and its outrages were due to Danny Strong, the guy who did the hatchet job on Sarah Palin for HBO. Buffy the Vampire Slayer (Strong was an actor on that show) meets history I guess.

http://www.hoover.org/publications/defining-ideas/article/154366

Gerald on August 20, 2013 at 10:43 am

I will say it again. BOYCOTT HOLLYWOOD. ALL MOVIES. ONLY then will the dopes in Hollywood learn.

As to Oprah, she was a stupid, ignorant woman who a terrible anchor on WBAL in Baltimore, who found people stupider than her to watch her dreck filled show. She is a real C U Next Tuesday.

Jonathan E. Grant on August 20, 2013 at 1:22 pm

@szkion:

Me? Mad at you? Ha. That would require from me a higher regard for you than I possess. But since you obviously have something against me, then I suppose that you do in fact hold me in some esteem in some way. I do not know whether to be flattered because of this or to pity you over it. Hmmm … I will arbitrarily choose the latter.

@skunky:

Well, if you do not know the difference between being homosexual (which is 100% unnatural) and black, well …

Gerald on August 21, 2013 at 10:55 am

    Did you choose to be Black Gerald? Homosexuality may not be natural but I don’t have hostility towards them just because. In fact, I have always preferred the company of the gay men over other sorts. As long as they are not stupid Libtards and are not sleazy scum bags.

    Nice try but no guitar. You afford yourself racial sensitivity (foolishly) and yet will not let gays have their own achilles heel. Not nice, not consistent and VERY hypocritical.

    But I always knew that about yee…

    Skunky on August 21, 2013 at 12:44 pm

    I see Gerald is pulling a Muslim. Two regulars have independently noticed that Gerald had suddenly started with anti-gay rhetoric, throwing it in where it was not even relevant. (Here, for example, the film’s lies derive from white libtards, black pro-Democratic partisanship, and black race mongering to extend their ability to fleece whites.) Gerald’s change of behavior occurred shortly after JEG and I whopped his ass. I guess it’s possible that some other event happened outside this web site at the same time as the whopping and that this event produced the change noted here, but I’m not buying it. He’s a delicate flower indeed.

    Gerald, dear, your blather about “regard” is either irrelevant or undermines your claim. Regarding the latter, one who holds another in contempt might surely start a series of attacks motivated by this contempt, especially when he had a public whopping after trying to use the race card one time too often.

    You are modestly intelligent but below the median for the regulars here. As you have some verbal facility and are black, you’ve been pandered to and pampered your whole life. While you are not particularly well educated, you have rarely been challenged. And while the recent focus on self-esteem has led dummies to believe that they are something else, you have had an additional unearned lift based on race. You fooled me for awhile because I’m generous and you seemed another black conservative. You’re no conservative. You’re that most offensive being: a homophobic, race-mongering libtard. You can’t even be consistent.

    “Well, if you do not know the difference between being homosexual (which is 100% unnatural) and black, well …

    Gerald on August 21, 2013 at 10:55 am”

    Duh, Gerald seems to be using the tired warhorse of race being genetically determined, unlike sexual orientation. How boring. But even if sexual orientation had no genetic component, it would not necessarily follow that who should frivolously insult someone because of it. Of course, there is very clearly a >0% genetic component (recall that 100%). Anyway, I’m too bored to continue.

    It’s rich, though, that Gerald is throwing around the term “unnatural,” with the frivolous “100%” added for good measure. This from a negro living in North America?! Talk about the “man-made”!

    Without spending much more time unpacking the term “natural” (Gerald is too uneducated to understand the complexity), let’s ponder for a moment the naturalness of Gerald’s racial demands. What could be more unnatural than negroes demanding special rights from white folk and white folk complying? True altruism is so unexpected in nature that sociobiologists coined the term “inclusive fitness” to explain that what appeared to be altruism wasn’t. Gerald expects white folk not only to pander to his sensitivities but to advantage blacks even more and to do so even though white individuals and their families are disadvantaged. BTW, this is why racial preferences are so overwhelmingly unpopular in the mass.

    skzion on August 21, 2013 at 6:41 pm

      Exactly, Skzion. Gerald wants pandering to HIS sensitivities but bulldozes over other sensitivities that he doesn’t relate to.

      That is NOT gonna fly. If he was consistent and could back up his biases, I could agree to disagree with him but it’s not about disagreement because he is unwilling to see the truth.

      That’s why it’s a hoot sometimes to stranglehold him on his bad arguments. But it’s NOT a hoot that he’s a poor thinker, doesn’t care about the truth and is hypocritical.

      Skunky on August 21, 2013 at 7:16 pm

        Skunky, Gerald is an unfortunate case. I always used to snicker about “a mind being a terrible thing to waste,” but I think that Gerald is an example of a wasted mind.

        Anyway, maybe if we ended all racial preferences as well as lifelong welfare and support for bastardy, we could lessen the waste.

        skzion on August 21, 2013 at 7:32 pm

Obama has certainly changed the climate when it comes to race relations. Just what our country needs, propaganda and out right lies from the media. First we get Trayvon the innocent, and now this movie. What does the left want – a race war? The portrayal of a White House butler by compiling the lives of multiple persons to create a story totally unrelated to the actual protagonist is total dishonesty. Then to advertise it as “Inspired by a true story”? From what I see it deserves the “Leni Riefenstahl “Truth in Propaganda Award” with Al Sharpton as the presenter.

Jimbo on August 21, 2013 at 5:59 pm

…and the historical revisionism continues… Seems that racists that are white or black love to spin, add, or delete information to continue their twisted agendas.

Mario on August 21, 2013 at 6:06 pm

Pretending that the Civil Rights Movement didn’t happen is extremely ignorant. The sit-ins happened, the lynchings happened, and so did the injustice. The movie was more about the MOVEMENT than the character.

Victoria on August 24, 2013 at 6:42 pm

Leave a Reply

* denotes required field