Conservatives haven’t had a show like “Landman” in ages. Maybe never?

The Paramount+ drama, starring Billy Bob Thornton as an oil and gas “fixer,” speaks directly to the Heartland in more ways than one.

The series understands the role oil plays in the American way of life. It may be messy, but we can’t live without what a classic sitcom called “Texas Tea.” The men and women who pump crude oil out of the earth are flawed but relatable.

The stories acknowledge their sacrifices without deifying them or their actions. The very first episode saw several workers die following an industry accident. 

Chilling.

It’s almost surreal to see something like “Landman” in 2026, given Hollywood’s progressive nature. And, more dramatically, the show takes occasional pot shots at the Left.

Last season, Thornton’s Tommy character gave an impassioned speech against green energy. Or, to be exact, why it isn’t what its supporters insist it is.

That sequence went viral, naturally, and show creator/writer Taylor Sheridan must have sensed how it caught fire with the public.

So he doubled down.

For season 2, Sheridan and co. have taken direct swipes at “The View” (twice).

Billy Bob’s description of “The View” on today’s episode of Landman is spot on

“Just a bunch of millionaires bitching about how much they hate Trump and men” pic.twitter.com/BW7XJq8cFk

— OKIE PATRIOT 76 (@okiepatriot_76) December 14, 2025

The show also refuses to bow to those who decry “the male gaze.”

Translation? The show’s buxom beauties – played by Ali Larter and Michelle Randolph – keep showing more skin than most dramas would allow. (And, to be fair, this season introduced a hunky new character played by Guy Burnet)

Last week’s ninth episode made those “View” wisecracks look tame by comparison.

Randolph’s Ainsley has a rough first meeting with her new college roommate, Paigyn. The two are studying similar topics, but they couldn’t be more different.

Ainsley is vapid, obsessed with fashion and generally upbeat. Paigyn has short, cropped hair and insists her new roommate use They/Them pronouns to address her.

You can imagine what happens next.

“Landman” has every right to introduce material like this. The sequence reflects the harsh reality of college life, and it shows how the woke among us can be cold and dictatorial.

Paigyn insists Ainsley avoid eating meat in their dorm room, not play music and other restrictions to preserve her safe space.

Paramount’s Landman OBLITERATES the pronouns argument after the show introduced a non-binary character as Ainsley Norris’s TCU roommate.

Non-binary roommate: “So what are your pronouns?”

Ainsley Norris: “My pronouns? I’d hope that was pretty clear?”

Non-binary roommate:… pic.twitter.com/faGDMrmTa9

— RedWave Press (@RedWave_Press) January 13, 2026

Wonderful. Funny. Necessary.

And yet the episode in question doesn’t give Paigyn much humanity. The show’s ability to deliver rich, textured characters is one of its strengths. Yet Paigyn is depicted as cold, cruel and joyless.

The “pronoun” confrontation went viral on social media, again, but “Landman” would be better served by allowing Paigyn a little dignity.

Right-leaning storytellers shouldn’t ape what progressive scribes too often do to conservative foils.

The post Has ‘Landman’ Gone Too Far in Bashing the Left? appeared first on Hollywood in Toto.

“IS THE NEW YORK TIMES A LIBERAL NEWSPAPER? OF COURSE IT IS:” The Same New York Times That Called Trump a ‘Nazi’ and ‘Fascist’ Objects to THIS Hateful Word for Women.

As the article piously reported:

In the days since a federal agent killed Renee Good in Minneapolis, Republican officials and conservative commentators have called the 37-year-old white woman “very violent,” a “deranged lunatic woman” and a “domestic terrorist.”

Some right-wing influencers have latched onto a different word — or rather an acronym: Ms. Good, they have said, was AWFUL.

“An AWFUL (Affluent White Female Urban Liberal) is dead after running her car into an ICE agent who opened fire on her,” the conservative commentator Erik Erickson posted on social media. “Progressive whites are turning violent. ICE agents have the right to defend themselves.”

Affluent. White. Female. Urban. Liberal.

Which of those five words does the Times believe is hateful?

Because for a solid decade now, the New York Times has bashed Donald Trump with the harshest, most vicious language imaginable. Words such as Nazi, Hitler, and fascist were used over and over again:

May 28, 2016: Rise of Donald Trump Tracks Growing Debate Over Global Fascism

Aug. 8, 2017: The Test of Nazism That Trump Failed

Sept. 11, 2018: Is Trump a Fascist?

Oct. 15, 2018: If You’re Not Scared About Fascism in the U.S., You Should Be

Nov. 30, 2020: 1918 Germany Has a Warning for America

Dec. 19, 2023: Trump Attacked for Echoing Hitler, Says He Never Read Mein Kampf

Oct. 29, 2024: Presidents, Conventions and Nazis: A Political History of ‘The Garden’

Nov. 6, 2024: Amid Talks of Fascism, Trump’s Threats and Language Evoke a Grim Past

Of course, every now and then, the Times would criticize Trump without calling him Hitler, a fascist, or a Nazi. For example, on April 13, 2018, the Times ran this delightful essay: “Tethered to a Raging Buffoon Called Trump.”

I dunno. Maybe it’s just me, but isn’t “raging buffoon” a tad more mean-spirited than AWFUL?

Apparently not. In fact, according to the Times, affluent white women are now a targeted, vulnerable minority — just like the Indians and Jews:

Liberal white women are only the latest group to be on the receiving end of right-wing animus. In late October and November, as Tucker Carlson offered a friendly interview to the Holocaust-denying white nationalist Nick Fuentes, the fear among some conservatives was that attacking Jews was inching toward the mainstream of the Republican Party. Last month, Vivek Ramaswamy, the wealthy entrepreneur who is a Republican candidate for governor in Ohio, was calling out a surge of bigotry directed at Indian Americans, like himself.

Exit quote: “Gosh, it’s almost as if the Times is telling its readers exactly what they want to hear.”

Because of its subscriber-based model, it has to. The consequences otherwise would be disastrous for the awful Gray Lady:

(Classical reference in headline.)

YES, SHE CAUSED A BELOVED FRANCHISE TO DEI A PAINFUL DEATH: Good riddance, Kathleen Kennedy.

If you wanted a skilled producer with excellent taste and blockbuster smarts, you sent for Kathleen Kennedy. And she delivered, over and over again.

It therefore was not remotely surprising that, when Lucasfilm passed into the hands of Disney, Kennedy was seen as the perfect person to shepherd their projects into highly profitable existence. With Star Wars pried from the protective hands of Lucas, Kennedy was free to expand the saga from a galaxy far, far away into a never-ending project in IP renewal. The first picture that came out, 2015’s The Force Awakens, was a shameless exercise in fan service, but it was still exciting and nonetheless made over $2 billion at the global box office. Kennedy was lauded to the skies; she announced plans for more films, to be released at the rate of one a year, and television series to fill in the gaps. Audiences loved Star Wars, and they were about to get an awful lot more of it.

What went wrong over the intervening decade represents one of the most fascinating – and deadening – studies in Hollywood hubris that there has ever been. There were two more canonical Star Wars films, Rian Johnson’s insultingly sneering and smug The Last Jedi, and returning director J.J. Abrams’s panicked The Rise of Skywalker, which was a desperate exercise in undoing all Johnson’s provocations. Both films were commercial hits but lacked the freshness of The Force Awakens.

As John Nolte wrote a couple of weeks ago, “Personally, Star Wars has worked so hard to alienate, offend, insult, and troll its loyal fanbase, it wouldn’t surprise me if Mandalorian & Grogu underperforms. We just don’t care anymore. There’s an air of indifference out there, a sense of moving on. I see it too with Paramount’s woke warping of its Star Trek franchise. The creators politicize their golden geese to a point where disappointment turns to anger and then the most deadly fate of all sets in for the brand: indifference.”

THE SUBSIDIES WERE DESIGNED TO MAKE IT IMPLODE: Affordable Care Act enrollments are down amid increased premiums.