'A Chill Wind is Blowing in This Nation...'
Transcript of the speech given by actor Tim Robbins to the National Press Club in Washington, D.C., on April 15, 2003.

TIM ROBBINS: Thank you. And thanks for the invitation. I had originally been asked here to talk about the war and our current political situation, but I have instead chosen to hijack this opportunity and talk about baseball and show business. (Laughter.) Just kidding. Sort of.

I can't tell you how moved I have been at the overwhelming support I have received from newspapers throughout the country in these past few days. I hold no illusions that all of these journalists agree with me on my views against the war. While the journalists' outrage at the cancellation of our appearance in Cooperstown is not about my views, it is about my right to express these views. I am extremely grateful that there are those of you out there still with a fierce belief in constitutionally guaranteed rights. We need you, the press, now more than ever. This is a crucial moment for all of us.

For all of the ugliness and tragedy of 9-11, there was a brief period afterward where I held a great hope, in the midst of the tears and shocked faces of New Yorkers, in the midst of the lethal air we breathed as we worked at Ground Zero, in the midst of my children's terror at being so close to this crime against humanity, in the midst of all this, I held on to a glimmer of hope in the naive assumption that something good could come out of it.

I imagined our leaders seizing upon this moment of unity in America, this moment when no one wanted to talk about Democrat versus Republican, white versus black, or any of the other ridiculous divisions that dominate our public discourse. I imagined our leaders going on television telling the citizens that although we all want to be at Ground Zero, we can't, but there is work that is needed to be done all over America. Our help is needed at community centers to tutor children, to teach them to read. Our work is needed at old-age homes to visit the lonely and infirmed; in gutted neighborhoods to rebuild housing and clean up parks, and convert abandoned lots to baseball fields. I imagined leadership that would take this incredible energy, this generosity of spirit and create a new unity in America born out of the chaos and tragedy of 9/11, a new unity that would send a message to terrorists everywhere: If you attack us, we will become stronger, cleaner, better educated, and more unified. You will strengthen our commitment to justice and democracy by your inhumane attacks on us. Like a Phoenix out of the fire, we will be reborn.

And then came the speech: You are either with us or against us. And the bombing began. And the old paradigm was restored as our leader encouraged us to show our patriotism by shopping and by volunteering to join groups that would turn in their neighbor for any suspicious behavior.

In the 19 months since 9-11, we have seen our democracy compromised by fear and hatred. Basic inalienable rights, due process, the sanctity of the home have been quickly compromised in a climate of fear. A unified American public has grown bitterly divided, and a world population that had profound sympathy and support for us has grown contemptuous and distrustful, viewing us as we once viewed the Soviet Union, as a rogue state.

This past weekend, Susan and I and the three kids went to Florida for a family reunion of sorts. Amidst the alcohol and the dancing, sugar-rushing children, there was, of course, talk of the war. And the most frightening thing about the weekend was the amount of times we were thanked for speaking out against the war because that individual speaking thought it unsafe to do so in their own community, in their own life. Keep talking, they said; I haven't been able to open my mouth.

A relative tells me that a history teacher tells his 11-year-old son, my nephew, that Susan Sarandon is endangering the troops by her opposition to the war. Another teacher in a different school asks our niece if we are coming to the school play. They're not welcome here, said the molder of young minds.

Another relative tells me of a school board decision to cancel a civics event that was proposing to have a moment of silence for those who have died in the war because the students were including dead Iraqi civilians in their silent prayer.

A teacher in another nephew's school is fired for wearing a T- shirt with a peace sign on it. And a friend of the family tells of listening to the radio down South as the talk radio host calls for the murder of a prominent anti-war activist. Death threats have appeared on other prominent anti-war activists' doorsteps for their views. Relatives of ours have received threatening e-mails and phone calls. And my 13-year-old boy, who has done nothing to anybody, has recently been embarrassed and humiliated by a sadistic creep who writes -- or, rather, scratches his column with his fingernails in dirt.

Susan and I have been listed as traitors, as supporters of Saddam, and various other epithets by the Aussie gossip rags masquerading as newspapers, and by their fair and balanced electronic media cousins, 19th Century Fox. (Laughter.) Apologies to Gore Vidal. (Applause.)

Two weeks ago, the United Way canceled Susan's appearance at a conference on women's leadership. And both of us last week were told that both we and the First Amendment were not welcome at the Baseball Hall of Fame.

A famous middle-aged rock-and-roller called me last week to thank me for speaking out against the war, only to go on to tell me that he could not speak himself because he fears repercussions from Clear Channel. "They promote our concert appearances," he said. "They own most of the stations that play our music. I can't come out against this war."

And here in Washington, Helen Thomas finds herself banished to the back of the room and uncalled on after asking Ari Fleischer whether our showing prisoners of war at Guantanamo Bay on television violated the Geneva Convention.

A chill wind is blowing in this nation. A message is being sent through the White House and its allies in talk radio and Clear Channel and Cooperstown. If you oppose this administration, there can and will be ramifications.

Every day, the air waves are filled with warnings, veiled and unveiled threats, spewed invective and hatred directed at any voice of dissent. And the public, like so many relatives and friends that I saw this weekend, sit in mute opposition and fear.

I am sick of hearing about Hollywood being against this war. Hollywood's heavy hitters, the real power brokers and cover-of-the- magazine stars, have been largely silent on this issue. But Hollywood, the concept, has always been a popular target.

I remember when the Columbine High School shootings happened. President Clinton criticized Hollywood for contributing to this terrible tragedy -- this, as we were dropping bombs over Kosovo. Could the violent actions of our leaders contribute somewhat to the violent fantasies of our teenagers? Or is it all just Hollywood and rock and roll?

I remember reading at the time that one of the shooters had tried to enlist to fight the real war a week before he acted out his war in real life at Columbine. I talked about this in the press at the time. And curiously, no one accused me of being unpatriotic for criticizing Clinton. In fact, the same radio patriots that call us traitors today engaged in daily personal attacks on their president during the war in Kosovo.

Today, prominent politicians who have decried violence in movies -- the "Blame Hollywooders," if you will -- recently voted to give our current president the power to unleash real violence in our current war. They want us to stop the fictional violence but are okay with the real kind.

And these same people that tolerate the real violence of war don't want to see the result of it on the nightly news. Unlike the rest of the world, our news coverage of this war remains sanitized, without a glimpse of the blood and gore inflicted upon our soldiers or the women and children in Iraq. Violence as a concept, an abstraction -- it's very strange.

As we applaud the hard-edged realism of the opening battle scene of "Saving Private Ryan," we cringe at the thought of seeing the same on the nightly news. We are told it would be pornographic. We want no part of reality in real life. We demand that war be painstakingly realized on the screen, but that war remain imagined and conceptualized in real life.

And in the midst of all this madness, where is the political opposition? Where have all the Democrats gone? Long time passing, long time ago. (Applause.) With apologies to Robert Byrd, I have to say it is pretty embarrassing to live in a country where a five-foot- one comedian has more guts than most politicians. (Applause.) We need leaders, not pragmatists that cower before the spin zones of former entertainment journalists. We need leaders who can understand the Constitution, congressman who don't in a moment of fear abdicate their most important power, the right to declare war to the executive branch. And, please, can we please stop the congressional sing-a- longs? (Laughter.)

In this time when a citizenry applauds the liberation of a country as it lives in fear of its own freedom, when an administration official releases an attack ad questioning the patriotism of a legless Vietnam veteran running for Congress, when people all over the country fear reprisal if they use their right to free speech, it is time to get angry. It is time to get fierce. And it doesn't take much to shift the tide. My 11-year-old nephew, mentioned earlier, a shy kid who never talks in class, stood up to his history teacher who was questioning Susan's patriotism. "That's my aunt you're talking about. Stop it." And the stunned teacher backtracks and began stammering compliments in embarrassment.

Sportswriters across the country reacted with such overwhelming fury at the Hall of Fame that the president of the Hall admitted he made a mistake and Major League Baseball disavowed any connection to the actions of the Hall's president. A bully can be stopped, and so can a mob. It takes one person with the courage and a resolute voice.

The journalists in this country can battle back at those who would rewrite our Constitution in Patriot Act II, or "Patriot, The Sequel," as we would call it in Hollywood. We are counting on you to star in that movie. Journalists can insist that they not be used as publicists by this administration. (Applause.) The next White House correspondent to be called on by Ari Fleischer should defer their question to the back of the room, to the banished journalist du jour. (Applause.) And any instance of intimidation to free speech should be battled against. Any acquiescence or intimidation at this point will only lead to more intimidation. You have, whether you like it or not, an awesome responsibility and an awesome power: the fate of discourse, the health of this republic is in your hands, whether you write on the left or the right. This is your time, and the destiny you have chosen.

We lay the continuance of our democracy on your desks, and count on your pens to be mightier. Millions are watching and waiting in mute frustration and hope - hoping for someone to defend the spirit and letter of our Constitution, and to defy the intimidation that is visited upon us daily in the name of national security and warped notions of patriotism.

Our ability to disagree, and our inherent right to question our leaders and criticize their actions define who we are. To allow those rights to be taken away out of fear, to punish people for their beliefs, to limit access in the news media to differing opinions is to acknowledge our democracy's defeat. These are challenging times. There is a wave of hate that seeks to divide us -- right and left, pro-war and anti-war. In the name of my 11-year-old nephew, and all the other unreported victims of this hostile and unproductive environment of fear, let us try to find our common ground as a nation. Let us celebrate this grand and glorious experiment that has survived for 227 years. To do so we must honor and fight vigilantly for the things that unite us -- like freedom, the First Amendment and, yes, baseball. (Applause.)

-------------------------------------------------------------------------

I know, I know another actor whose voice isn't worth anything, but he does bring up some great points on what is happening to and in the US. It so happens that I agree with him.... except for his love of baseball. Way to go for speaking out against the Bush regime.

It's nice to know there is a Canadian who cares.

or to paraphrase for those with sock drawers to rearrange...
In the analysis, his whole argument rests on the assumption that he doesn't have the freedom to communicate his argument...

can you see the fundamental problem with this? :D

[ 04-17-2003, 03:13 PM: Message edited by: Thoran ]

In the analysis, his whole argument rests on the assumption that he doesn't have the freedom to communicate his argument...

can you see the fundamental problem with this? :D </font>[/QUOTE]Maybe you missed the parts about people getting death threats? That would certainly have a chilling effect free speech imo.

Of course I care Lil Lil it has nothing to do with borders or nationality however. I care about what will happen to the Iraqi people and those losing family members from both sides, I care about people having to fear about speaking out because of the consequences dealt to them by other people. I care about every single child that has to go to bed hungry at night because there isn't enough food. I care about people having their homes destroyed by people who may not replace them after their work is done. Yes, I do care.

Yes... death threats. I didn't miss that part and if it's not fabricated I expect that the police will be looking into it (because it's a crime).

All the things he wrote about hostile reaction against war opponents is pretty much the opposite of what I've personally seen, so to be honest I don't believe it. Sure lots of people will argue with war opponents... but that's their right. I have not seen documented evidence of the extreme sorts of activities he's detailing. In reality I've seen a fairly open and honest debate of the issues, democracy in action. Of course when things don't go their way Liberals quickly pull out the "we're being victimized" routine. I think they tend to see themselves as selfless and unthanked martyrs, sacrificing themselves so that we all may see and believe their oh so correct point of view.

There have been anti-war demonstrations ALL OVER the place, and the only violence I can recall was commited by anti-war Canadians against a bunch of young US hockey players.

Do you know of any confirmed attacks of demonstrators or war opponents? I'm not saying it can't happen (there's wacko's out there on both sides of the equation) but I have yet to see it.

[ 04-17-2003, 03:32 PM: Message edited by: Thoran ]

This thread: http://www.ironworksforum.com/ubb/no...=000614#000000

Contains two examples. I can find you many more.

I know you do, and I do too but until our Constitution is rewritten, until speaking becomes outlawed, I am not going to assume the worst of our government and the people who run it...I can expect the worst from them, but I will neither assume nor anticipate it...that's a waste of time and energy that can be best spent doing more worthwhile things...like feeding a hungry person or helping someone repair their home for nothing...there are lots of things we can do as the human race to help make it better for others without giving people who are feeling sorry for themselves because they were uninvited to a party room to make it appear worse than it is and letting them spreading fear and hatred...especially when that's what they are saying of the other side.

Here is one a bit more on the humerous side:
http://www.ironworksforum.com/ubb/cg...;f=14;t=000595

That same thread contains examples on the other side also. As I said above you'll always get the fringe groups, people willing to use violence to emphasize their position. This however is a far cry from government sponsored censorship and one side persecution of the anti-war activists... which does not appear to be happening.

[ 04-17-2003, 03:47 PM: Message edited by: Thoran ]

Very nice speech ! *Applause*

I always liked Tim Robbins in his films, I knew he couldn't be a bad guy. [img]smile.gif[/img]

And what you guys fail to understand is that by not "inviting a star to a party" (©LilLil) because of his politic views and positions, you CLEARLY send a message to other ones saying : "If you open your mouth, expect the same thing". That's where freedom of speech starts to die.

I disagree, the message it sends is "if you plan to be an activist, expect to be treated like one". No organization is under the obligation to provide a podium for activists to communicate their position. Doing this is tantamount to supporting their position unless you have an opposing view expressed at the same time. The safe road for any non-political organization is to avoid any association with activists of ANY side.

Freedom dies when people and organizations are FORCED to do something because someone else thinks they should. Cooperstown was free to uninvite Tim, Tim is free to complain about it. You're free to support him, and I'm free to support Cooperstown.

If you force Cooperstown to accept Tim... how is that improving freedom?

That same thread contains examples on the other side also. As I said above you'll always get the fringe groups, people willing to use violence to emphasize their position. This however is a far cry from government sponsored censorship and one side persecution of the anti-war activists... which does not appear to be happening.</font>[/QUOTE]If you say so.

I was wondering though, could you kindly point me to examples of death threats vs pro-war people, or examples of anti-war people trying to run down pro-war people protesting on the sidewalk? Or maybe some examples of anti-war media celebrities advocating people go down and intimidate a pro-war rally. How about examples of anti-war spokespeople initiating a letter writing campaign to get pro-war persons employer telling them to fire the pro-war columnist?

I didn't think so.

The rhetoric is much more violent and threatening from pro-war side then anything I have seen from the anti-war side

<font color=plum>Nobody has said his voice (or the voice of any other actors/actresses) "isn't worth anything". What we have said is that it isn't worth ANY MORE than Joe Average Citizen. One of the most interesting statements Robbins made was <font color=yellow>Our ability to disagree, and our inherent right to question our leaders and criticize their actions define who we are.</font> I agree completely, but it seems Robbins and Sarandon are the ones who are upset about people "disagreeing" with them. He lists several examples of he and Susan being told or indirectly informed that they (and their views) aren't welcome in a particular venue. They claim this is a violation of the First Amendment rights. <font color=lime>BZZZZZZZZZZZZ!</font> Wrong answer, Mr. Robbins...but thank you for playing. If his First Amendment rights were truly being violated, he wouldn't have been able to give this interview. He would not be able to express his views on TV or any other public appearance he makes. There would be armed guards standing there ensuring he didn't utter these "traitorous" words. That hasn't happened. The First Amendment ONLY states that the government cannot place restrictions on an individual's right to free speech. Individual businesses and venues - however - DO NOT have to abide by the standards. It was pointed out in the <font color=skyblue>Sounds of Silence</font> thread that celebrities DO have a right to voice their opinions..but the general public is under NO obligation to listen to them.

Robbins talks about "our right to disagree" defining who we are...but he does not practice what he preaches. All of the incidents he described were recounted to him at a recent family reunion. Judging from his comments, EVERYONE at the reunion was anti-war - so where was the disagreement? The same is true for many other Hollywood celebs. They talk among themselves about these "world topics"...but they only talk to those that agree with them. When one of their own disagrees or supports a conservative POV on a given issue, they will quickly find themselves "blackballed" by the "in crowd". And I think this is one of the biggest problems these celebs face. They aren't really willing to hear a dissenting view themselves. They think they are right and everyone should agree with them. They would be well served to spend some time on Ironworks or a similar forum where they actually have to respond to opposing views and offer legitimate counter-arguments, rather than just claiming their First Amendment rights are being violated when they meet with disagreement.

{deep cleansing breath]OK.....now that I got THAT off my chest, I will agree that Robbins DID raise several good points. The unity we felt as a nation after the 9/11 attack was truly a sight to behold. To see our congressmen actually put aside their partisan labels (at least temporarily) and to stand united under the more encompassing label of <font color=white>"American"</font> was awe-inspiring indeed. I also had great hope for our nation to become closer as a nation and to move away from the divisive labels we have adopted to reflect our various viewpoints. But, alas, it did not occur. [img]graemlins/verysad.gif[/img] It was only a matter of time before the infighting and name-calling returned to Capitol Hill. Both sides share an equal amount of blame as they exaggerated their claims of the potential consequences that would result from allowing their political opponents viewpoint to be followed. Although I fully support him, I also have to lay a large portion of the blame on President Bush. Diplomacy is NOT his strong point. <font color=palegreen>Pritchke</font> mentioned the change in "international attitude" towards the U.S. and states how it has moved from overwhelming support and sympathy after 9/11 to fear, anger, and distrust by many nations now. Americans (myself included) don't like to hear such claims, but facts are facts. Whether this "international attitude" is justified or not doesn't really matter. What does matter is the fact that it DOES exist (whether we admit it or not), and it IS an issue we (as a nation) should address.

I also agree that Robbins had several other good points - and some of the incidents he mentioned (if true) definitely should have never happened. I think this is the true legacy of the America - is that each of us ARE allowed to express our individual opinions and that we would ALL benefit from listening to opposing views - because none of us are 100% right all of the time.</font>

<font color=plum>HEY <font color=cyan>MASKLINN</font>!!!! It's good to "see" you again. I heard that you had been "ethnically cleansed". [img]graemlins/wow.gif[/img] I'm very pleased to see the circumstances of your demise were greatly exaggerated. [img]graemlins/thumbsup.gif[/img]

<font color=orange>Thoran</font> already addressed your last comment. I would just add that - for every venue that "uninvites" Robbins, Sarandon, or any other anti-war celeb - there is obviously another venue that will extend an invitation to them. Again, if Robbins' First Amendment rights were truly being compromised, he would not have been able to give this speech at all.</font>

AS I read that joke I could only think of one thing...

He and Susan (and the rest) want attention soooooooooooo bad

Good speech. [img]graemlins/thumbsup.gif[/img] It's not anti-war, but anti-oppression of free speech, and who can disagree with that? [img]graemlins/1ponder.gif[/img] We cannot let ourselves go down McCarthy's road.

No one wants the kind of attention he's dealing with. His hollywood opportunities will be worse after his speaking out than before. I mean, these are two A-listers for Crissake - they can have all the attention they want.

You know what TL with all due respect. You don't (and I) know what he want's and does not.

"Stars" are very good at drama. They excel at it and use it at every chance. Next he will call himself Ghandi and claim to have been shot at.

People have every right to not invite him to a party. They can cancel if they so choose. People can be conscious of who they fund and who they do not. What is so sad is how a select few that DISLIKE (at best) this government anyway are crying for the spotlight. Why am I shocked? that is what stars do.

People all across America had wives/husbands/children/parents in Iraq fighting. The same exact time his wife is insulting their commander and chief in every way possible. She has every right to do that. People have every right to view her anyway they so choose.

Hollywood has it's own idea of "life" and EXPECT people to listen up when they speak. The fact is no other group is so far out of touch or hypocritical at the same time. They seem to think that acting grants the +3 to intel and +4 to wisdom. Well it don't.

But here is where it REALLY get's me. Hollywood is one of the most discriminating places in America. Say you are a republican and see how many parties, event's you get invited to. Heck just see how many roles get thrown you're way. The same exact phony group in a place we call "tinsel" town is crying about discrimination! It don't get better then that. They have been discriminating for decades! How about Mel Gibson? After he decided to make a movie about Jesus he was harrased! He called it a "career killer". Some tolerance. That is why this is a huge joke.

They have no respect. I mean they don't even follow up one their own BS. Baldwin why are you still here?

Oh and McCarthy implies goverment. I have not seen one shred of evidence that the goverment has stopped any Hollywood star from speaking even though they nailed Bush to a cross. Using that name is a red herring at best

Mordenheim, the Patriot Act itself is the first step down the road to McCarthyism. But, you are right - generally it is not the government that's doing this. And, you are right in that everyone has the right to *not* listen to the things he has a right to say.

I think it is generally poor form to characterize all of Hollywood (and I myself am guilty), and Robbins points this out in his speech rather well. Arnie never gets black-listed, and he is certainly a Republican. Hollywood folks tend to be pretty liberal, but then again - it *is* located in California, where Dems and Repugs alike are pretty liberal.

But, if you do want to characterize Hollywood, I find it to be one of the most self-critical places you could cite. Movies like "15 Minutes," "Bullworth," etc. bash the very institutions that are putting them up on the screen. Indeed no one derides the hype of fame more than Hollywood. Biting self-honesty is still present in America, even though most media sources, like most Americans, are on the patriotism band wagon.

Remember, the "anti war" speeches at the Oscars got as many (or more) boos as cheers, despite what those making the comments suggest.

I think this is the true legacy of the America - is that each of us ARE allowed to express our individual opinions and that we would ALL benefit from listening to opposing views - because none of us are 100% right all of the time.

That is one of the things I like about IW.

Yes it does, but McCarthyism also spawned the infamous hollywood 'blacklists' where many talented actors, actresses, directors, and others were denied work based on the merest hint they where communists.

<font color=plum>That last part is a bit exaggerated, but your main point is very valid, <font color=palegreen>Mordenheim</font>. I remember a real-life incident involving Joan Collins during the 80's when <font color=white>Dynasty</font> was the top prime-time soap opera. She was involved in a trial (I can't remember about what) and was called to the witness stand for several days to testify. She said that the first couple of days, everyone in the courtroom was acting somewhat "odd" towards her. Finally, she realized the problem...they weren't expecting Joan Collins to testify - they were looking for the "bitchy" attitude of Alexis (her character on Dynasty). On the third day of the trial, she began "playing the role" of Alexis on the stand... and the trial started to go her way. She had to slip into character in order to be taken seriously.

As <font color=palegreen>Mordenheim</font> points out, these actors and actresses play dramatic roles very well. They know how to play to an audience because that is what they do for a living!

<font color=plum>Despite the objections of our esteemed counselor, I have to agree with you 100% I'm sorry, but 2 movies out of the hundreds that are made does not strike me as being overly "self-critical". How many of the other movies produced by Hollywood followed the standard formula of corrupt corporations or gov't officials as the primary antagonist? And to claim that Hollywood is NOT discriminatory is turning a blind eye to the obvious.

And - as Mel Gibson found out - Christianity is even more of a taboo topic...unless the Religious Representative is portrayed as the antaganist (Poltergeist 3, Cape Fear, etc). Plenty of "alternate" religions are portrayed in the "heroic role", but if Christianity is portrayed at all, it is almost universally in the role of the villain in today's Hollywood. This is not "paranoia"...it is simple fact.

Now I will admit that <font color=tan>Timber</font> is correct about Arnie...he is a staunch conservative and it hasn't affected his career too greatly. Of course, his megastar status was well established before he decided to become "active" in politics. He waited until he had enough clout to withstand any firestorm that might come his way.</font>

Wanna explain that one to me? :mad:

Wanna explain that one to me? :mad: </font>[/QUOTE]Chill, mon ami...note the wink at the top of the original post...pay attention to the negative media Canada is getting for their present anti-American stance in the war with iraq...I am well aware that not all Canadians agree with the decisions of their governing officials...Canadians should be well aware that not all Americans feel the same way Tim Robbins does...if you still "don't get it" I can't help you, sorry.

Wanna explain that one to me? :mad: </font>[/QUOTE]Chill, mon ami...note the wink at the top of the original post...pay attention to the negative media Canada is getting for their present anti-American stance in the war with iraq...I am well aware that not all Canadians agree with the decisions of their governing officials...Canadians should be well aware that not all Americans feel the same way Tim Robbins does...if you still "don't get it" I can't help you, sorry.</font>[/QUOTE]I missed the wink, my apologies. Actually Bush has agreed to stop molesting Canadian citizens at the US border now, so that's something positive. (I think he realized that Canada is an intregral part of the US and he'd be severly screwed without us. Only if our own politicians would realize this. :D )

I actually do agree with Canada's stance in not officialy involving ourselves in this war, based upon the initial reasons given for it. I applaud Chretien (just this once :D ) for his stance on this matter.

Apology graciously accepted and thank you! [img]smile.gif[/img] *whew*! :D

I think if Canadian ships in the Gulf were farther away from the conflict that the Americans could see where Chretian could stand on firm ground when he refuses to allow POW's or former Iraqi government officials to be turned over the the U.S. (or the coalition, whatever) "if they happen to fall into Canadian hands". I guess we'll see how popular his stance is later this year? [img]smile.gif[/img]

Fox's Bill O'Reilly is on a hell bent campaign to get people to start boycotting products from any country that doesn't cooperate with the U.S. including Canada. :eek: Good gawd, if he gets his way, we'll be left with none of our own resources and dependent on everyone we snubbed for having their own opinion. He hates the fact that Chretian and Clinton would dare play golf together while not playing war with bush...I think we need to make room for him in the sandbox...check your PM ;)

Come on Timber... Arnold? what, he is one of three republican's in tinsel town? Home of the tummy tuck and private jet? I have heard myself actor's blacklisted in hollywood. Most republican's won't even say what they are.

Mel Gibson is a prime example. He did not come out openly about his Christianity in public until he had won his oscar and did not care.

Hollywood lives and dies by the sword. They love fame but there is a price. That price is people can embrace or turn away from you. They get paid to act and nothing more. Why don't we be honest? they are entertainers. They get paid to entertain. They get paid very well. We hold them way too high on a pedastal. They make a insane amount of money. Somewhere they get this idea that they know more then the average person and that is a sham. They know how to fake cry and play a role. For instance Julia Roberts did not graduate from high school. Yet to hear her talk you would think she know's more about how America should be run then anybody in our govermment.

I am not for government discimination. I am however for conscious choices. I am for real freedom including the right to support those you choose to. No one forces anyone to do anything here. Just for the record I have not boycotted a single thing. I still drink evian water. I do however support fellow Americans from doing so if they desire. This idea that they are "discriminating" is total bs. Hollywood is having a shock that the "peasents" got angry and made phone calls and e-mails to bussiness demanding they pull the plug. Well my friend that is democracy. No different then using it to rally support against Bush. No different then Jessie Jackson demanding a boycott against company x if they don't pay him. That is what makes us great. Hollywood is not above it and that just scares the hell out of them.

How many times have you said repug? People lump people together all the time. Let us not try to get too high and mighty here. It is a human trait. This idea that you can not be a patriot is sickning. Not everyone American has to be a self loathing conspirecy driven citizen.

We had troops in the war as well. There were a few Canadian troops assigned with US divisions that ended up in Iraq along side your men and women.

I thought Clinton was a great president. Sure he had some issues (who doesn't) but overall I think he was a boon for the US and I wish Canada had a Prime Minister like Clinton.

Canadians provide aid for Iraq, we still support the war on terrorism, but we question the morals and intentions of this war against Iraq. Now that there is talk of "who's next" it becomes a very scary proposition, akin to the old Spanish Inquisition.

You are American, so you are safe. The position of "with us or against us" reminds me of a certain figure from the late '30's, early 40's.

Check your PM. (not sure if it went through)

Hehe, don't worry, he will never get his way. See my other thread about it, even the company he works for signs deal with French companies. This guy is a clown who has no sense of reality.

"a clown who has no sense of reality" ROFL, yeah I hear ya!
"You have a right to your opinion" (but only if you agree to let me step all over it, and butt in on your voicing it to debunk it with my own before I call you insane for having it) ;)

I had no idea that they were that close, thanks for the info! [img]graemlins/thumbsup.gif[/img]



Clinton was one of the most popular presidents since JFK...not that he was as great a leader as JFK, but nearly as popular with the public. I liked him. [img]smile.gif[/img]



Yeah, the who's next talk has me on edge, esp since the Bush admin has spun their reasons behind going into Iraq so hard and so fast that they seem to believe every new rumor and lie.
I think they may have bitten off more than they can chew by proposing a democracy in Iraq, but we'll see....if it is really what they want and American companies can keep their fingers on only just a piece of the oil pie, it may actually work...but in years, not months as they are predicting.



Funny, I don't feel safe. ;) I am not worrying though...crying today over what could happen tomorrow only makes today suck. [img]tongue.gif[/img]

[img]smile.gif[/img]
Got it! But you know that by now. [img]smile.gif[/img]