Image 01 Image 03

Venezuelan Journalist Calls Out Jim Carrey’s “Say ‘Yes’ to Socialism” Schtick

Venezuelan Journalist Calls Out Jim Carrey’s “Say ‘Yes’ to Socialism” Schtick

“Dear Jim, I admire you a lot, but sometimes it seems that the inability of Hollywood stars to understand politics is directly proportional to their talent”

Actor Jim Carrey appeared on Bill Maher’s show last week and sang the praises of socialism; at one point he stated, “We have to say yes to socialism — to the word and everything.”

Venezuelan journalist Laureano Márquez was appalled and wrote a searing response in which he noted that Venezuela’s on-going crises are the direct result of socialism. He also points out that people are “fleeing the country ‘however way they can’ as they do not have access to medication, food or other basic needs.”

Carrey can be seen making this claim in the following commercial for the Orwellian absurdity embraced by today’s leftists, “democratic socialism.”

It’s not at all clear to me why the Washington Post is making commercials for “democratic socialism,” but there it is.

Márquez found Carrey’s statement misguided and zinged him by noting that he finds Carrey to be very talented and that “it seems that the inability of Hollywood stars to understand politics is directly proportional to their talent.”

Fox News reports:

One week after Jim Carrey suggested we “say yes to socialism,” a Venezuelan journalist is speaking out against the actor’s suggestion.

. . . . In an article published in the Venezuelan outlet Runrunes, columnist Laureano Márquez argued that socialism is the root cause of the country’s current state of crisis.

“Dear Jim, I admire you a lot, but sometimes it seems that the inability of Hollywood stars to understand politics is directly proportional to their talent,” Marquez began his column.

“I read that…you said: ‘We have to say yes to socialism, to the word [‘socialism’] and to everything.’ Perhaps for you, as for all humanity, the word ‘socialism’ sounds beautiful,” he continued.

The journalist then went on to explain that while many define socialism as “the antithesis of selfishness, synonym of concern for others…support for the weakest and their needs, of seeking health and education for all,” in reality Marquez believes socialism today has “deep threats.”

“[In] Venezuela, what we find is just that our regime is not – for God’s sake – the antithesis of selfishness,” he wrote Wednesday. “In Venezuela, dear Jim, from what I have just told you, there is no equitable distribution of wealth; wealth is concentrated, as rarely before in our history, in very few hands.”

Here’s the full Carrey segment from Maher’s show:


Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.


Ole’ Ace clearly reveals that as long as the subject is pets he’s quite the Detective. However, once that Mask he wears is removed, it’s perfectly plain for all to see that he keeps getting Dumb and Dumber. So, while he may think that he’s having Fun With Dick and Jane, as well as the rest of us, his fixation that he’s Bruce Almighty keeps him from seeing the “pen is blue.” Keep being a Liar, Liar, Jim, and soon you’ll be Doing Time on Maple Drive.

JusticeDelivered | September 16, 2018 at 5:05 pm

An ability to act or be funny does not translate into many other useful skills. Interest in socialism usually is driven by a desire for free things, and the problem with free things is that those who work quickly become tired of supporting those who do not. Socialism kills economies.

When did we start making court jesters as important as kings?

Jim Carey trying to drive America to suicide – like he did his girlfriend?

More political advice from an astonishing ignoramus and weirdo.

“5 Horrible Things Jim Carrey Allegedly Did To His Ex-Girlfriend Before She Committed Suicide (According To Her Therapist)”

The Pandora’s box of an easy college education and low school standards in this country is going wild.

All we truly possess in this world is our time and talent(s); whether managed or developed properly is another discussion.

In the West, we used to prize the concept of free thought, free markets, free people. We freely exchanged our time and talents for other goods, services, or money. If the other goods, services, or money were inadequate, we freely made other choices, and the inadequates went the way of buggy whips, rotary phones, and Sears Roebuck.

However, when those with a tyrannical bent usurp the power of the state to lay claim to a portion of your time and talent without your consent to just compensation that is theft. When when those with an tyrannical bent usurp the power of the state to lay claim to the vast majority of your time and talent without your consent to just compensation that is slavery.

Socialism, democratic or otherwise, is not freedom. Taken to its eventual extreme (like Venezuela, et al), socialism is slavery – and always ends up with a gun in your face. Those who promote socialism promote slavery. I oppose slavery, and those who promote it. They are dangerously ignorant, enemies of freedom, and must be eliminated by any means necessary (politically speaking, of course).

Socialism is equitable distribution of poverty (with those in the connect class being exempt, of course).

    JusticeDelivered in reply to nordic_prince. | September 17, 2018 at 9:24 am

    Since slaves under capitalism were a valuable commodity, I bet they were treated better in America than their fellows who remained in Africa. Most certainly slaves were treated better than Native Americans.

    In any event, slaves under capitalism were much better off than those living under socialism. At least in America, they did not starve.

    And most advocating for Socialism *THINK* they will be in the connected class and all will be well for them. The reality hits. I wonder how many actors and other entertainers in general in Venezuela once thought they were in the protected/connected class and are now living off scraps?

“”Socialism, democratic or otherwise, is not freedom.””

Exactly. Many “socialist” countries have elections. They just don’t allow actual voting to determine who wins.

“”socialism is slavery””

Also true. When everybody works for the state, you don’t get a choice in what labor you’re assigned. The only difference between socialism and the antebellum South is private ownership of the slaves.

It is amazing that the three groups of people who are at all interested in living in a socialist society are the rich, the very poor and academics. The rich think that their money will insulate them in such a society [though it never has in the past. The very poor have nothing to lose. And most academics are certifiable.

    The academics are ‘certifiable,’ but don’t let them off the hook that easy: they’re in the $$$$ game of it: they have the most cushy jobs, and cannot get fired. Their only real ‘job’ is to promote leftism and placate their paymasters.

    Boehernism, Bushism, McCainism, Ryanism, McConnellism, etc, brought us to this.

    Trumpism is our only way out, though Sessionism has probably prevented our last ‘out.’

    Expect the nation to fragment. Prepare to pick your new government based on where in the ‘new’ American map you’d be willing to move to. (That assumes no shots are fired.)

Some are confusing “Socialism” with the “Social Media” explosion. Since they like Facebook, Twitter, and their cell phones, “Socialism” shouldn’t be all that bad. Wow, we have some education to do!!

These socialist-wannabes seem to think that people doing the heavy-lifting now are going to continue to do so when they’re getting hammered with even greater tax rates. Opportunity costs exist for a reason; they’re just human nature, and people aren’t going to care about what’s good for the collective when they’re the ones expected to do all the work.