<font color='white'>I dont have a link to the story, but just from memory it went something like this-

Clooney was at a fundraiser, or some srot of gathering and he was going to speak, he decided to start off with a little joke he said-

"Charelton Heston annouced again today that he is suffering from Alzhimers."

How completely and utterly distasteful is this? And get this, when a reporter asked him if his remark was a little wrong he replied-

"No, Heston is head of the NRA and deserives anything he gets."

To disagree with ones polotics is one thing, but to mock their illness is compeltey out of line.

Openmindedness, righ..? </font>

Since we are talking about strange remarks, did any of you watch the Golden Globe award?

There was one girl that won an award. It was a blonde girl, typical hollywood kind. She went up, took her award, and said "You have no idea how many people I had to sleep with to get this award!" and then she added some more things of that kind.

I was playing Divine Divinity, and the tv was playing, and that totally surprised me.

For some strange reason, I don't think she'll win any award any time soon again. ;)

[ 01-21-2003, 02:23 AM: Message edited by: Luvian ]

Eh Luvian, it was an actress fromm Sex and The City, if you've watched the show then you might understand the "joke"...

[edit] oh and that Clooney remark was totally unnecessary, Hollywood actors should not be allowed to express their politics openly...

[ 01-21-2003, 03:19 AM: Message edited by: Jorath Calar ]

I'm sorry but that's complete bollocks. They are people, just like the rest of us. They have the right to their opinions, their politics, and the right to express them. If someone told you that you should not be allowed to express your politics openly I bet that there would be cries of 'free speech' echoing all over the place. I'm sure Hitler or Stalin would have loved your suggestion. Which other professions would you like to gag?

For what it's worth, I do agree that Clooney's comment was in poor taste.

Erm....sorry but...what is the NRA ?

I'm sorry but that's complete bollocks. They are people, just like the rest of us. They have the right to their opinions, their politics, and the right to express them. If someone told you that you should not be allowed to express your politics openly I bet that there would be cries of 'free speech' echoing all over the place. I'm sure Hitler or Stalin would have loved your suggestion. Which other professions would you like to gag?

For what it's worth, I do agree that Clooney's comment was in poor taste.</font>[/QUOTE]Epona beat me to it. [img]graemlins/thumbsup.gif[/img]

Hollywood actors have a tougher legal hurdle to win a privacy or slander/libel case - which is why Enquirer and other rags can report untruths without fear of ramification. The legal theory is that one who's in the public spotlight is putting themselves up for public debate/ridicule. In order to win these cases a famous and/or political figure must prove you said the untruth with malice, meaning "with the intention to hurt them."

So, if they have less rights than the rest of us regarding privacy, etc., is it fair to also take away their rights to express their politics - thereby limiting their access to the First, and most important (considering public opinion only), Amendment? Hoooooog - Waaaaaaash!

NRA stands for The National Rifle Association, IIRC... Making it kind of logical that Iron Ranger of all people complained about it. ;)

[ 01-21-2003, 09:52 AM: Message edited by: Grojlach ]

I am not a member of the NRA, not would I consider being so, and I find Clooney's remark in poor taste, like Epona. But, as TL says, he does pay a price for his celebrity. I would hate to have some of the remarks that I have made about Alec Baldwin and Babs Streisand made public.

Of course Hollywood people should be allowed to say what they want. In the cases of clowns like Sean Penn and George clooney, it just gives them an opportunity to show how damn stupid they are.

Some kind of We_Love_Guns Association ?

Ehh, guys... okey guy and a girl... whatever... I probably could and should have explained better but I was going to class so I was in a hurry... but I mean have you ever heard a Hollywood actor who made a strong point, but not some blathering cliches made up by their marketing team and spoken to appear intelligent and to hide the fact they are just Clowns...?
I know it's effective when they say it, because they are actors but seriously, it doesn't mean anything...

And let's not forget Ronald Reagan and John Wayne.

By the way, in my curious search for information about the NRA a minute ago, I stumbled upon several sites claiming that this Charlton Heston guy made "inflammatory remarks regarding women, gays and lesbians, and African Americans; while at the same time trivializing the Holocaust" during a speech before the Free Congress Foundation in 1997.
If that's true, it doesn't automatically make Clooney's remarks any less of poor taste, but it does make them a lot more understandable, actually...

[ 01-21-2003, 10:17 AM: Message edited by: Grojlach ]

Stupid ? For saying they're not for war and not for guns ?

Riiiight.

Go war, go guns, all good stuff, and those who don't agree are such clowns ! Yaya :D

Oh btw you all misunderstood Clooney's message, you should have read between the lines : "Do not give a gun to a alzheimer diseased guy"

And that makes sense, really.

:D :D :D

I have heard this all before Timber. This is the classic example of a double standard. Can anyone imagine how much hand wringing would have occured if it was Heston saying the same about.... Oh... Carter if *he* had that illness? This is yet another typical example of a Hollywood type talking out their A$$ because their mouth knows better.
So please explain how any and all of this morons comments were not said with malice?

I agree here, bunk-holes like Clooney *need* the right to free speech, just so us normal people out here can see him for the idiot he is, and, just as is the case with other jack-a$$es (like the KKK or Black Panthers). However, the first reaction shouldnt be the limiting of his free speech, make your reactions at the box office and movie rental stores. Once this flake isnt marketable any longer, the studios will lose him like a bad habit. Thats, whats called the repurcussions from stretching the spirit of your right.
All that can be said about this instance is that it is a classic example of a pusillanimous comment, where a coward hides behind fame and politics to belittle a person with a degenerative disease. And his reasoning? Because he heads the NRA..... George Clooney, what a low life piece of amoeba scum.

<font color=orange>I sort of doubt what you say about Charlton Heston, since it is common knowledge that he was a supporter of Martin Luther King I have seen documentaries on the History Channel showing him standing and marching side-by-side with Dr. King. In 2001 he received the Martin Luther King Jr. Award from the Congress of Racial Equility and if I remember correctly he was a Member of the ACLU. I somehow don't think they would have given him an award like that, had he made a speech castigating Blacks and women.

My guess is that the sites you happened to stumble on where somewhat left bent and are some how trying to smear is name over his stance concerning firearms!
</font>

I agree Sir T. The "problem" with Heston, is his affiliation, with the left wing hated NRA. 'Ain't it amazing how simpleton that is? And to think, the left is the group, who always blast their trumpets about being for the rights of "the little guy". The NRA membership is made up *of* the little guys by *VAST* majority. But we can't go around *trusting* people to responsibly practice their rights now can we? :rolleyes:
Thats what is truly amazing. We *can* trust a murderer to be released after serving their "life" sentence, we *can* trust abusive parents with custody of their children again, we *can* trust drug addicts to not relapse and continue a life of crime to support their habit(s), we *can* trust people who spike trees in order to kill and maim lumberjacks, we *can* trust the PETA crowd to not *actually* be all about illegalizing the consumption of meat and dairy products, but we *can't* trust people, of whom the great majority have absolutely no problems with society or the law in general, because they own a firearm. ;)
The real answer is, it depends upon which rights we are talking about. With some, if you have any affiliation with the NRA, you are to be demonized *period* by any ways or means necessary. Sad but true.

[ 01-21-2003, 12:23 PM: Message edited by: ElricMorlockin ]

I have heard this all before Timber. This is the classic example of a double standard. Can anyone imagine how much hand wringing would have occured if it was Heston saying the same about.... Oh... Carter if *he* had that illness? This is yet another typical example of a Hollywood type talking out their A$$ because their mouth knows better.
So please explain how any and all of this morons comments were not said with malice?

Quote:

So, if they have less rights than the rest of us regarding privacy, etc., is it fair to also take away their rights to express their politics - thereby limiting their access to the First, and most important (considering public opinion only), Amendment? Hoooooog - Waaaaaaash!

I agree here, bunk-holes like Clooney *need* the right to free speech, just so us normal people out here can see him for the idiot he is, and, just as is the case with other jack-a$$es (like the KKK or Black Panthers). However, the first reaction shouldnt be the limiting of his free speech, make your reactions at the box office and movie rental stores. Once this flake isnt marketable any longer, the studios will lose him like a bad habit. Thats, whats called the repurcussions from stretching the spirit of your right.
All that can be said about this instance is that it is a classic example of a pusillanimous comment, where a coward hides behind fame and politics to belittle a person with a degenerative disease. And his reasoning? Because he heads the NRA..... George Clooney, what a low life piece of amoeba scum.[/QB]</font>[/QUOTE]Look, Elric, I'm not gonna take up for Clooney's comment, because it was obviously a case of foot-in-mouth disease. And, because I don't have any particular love for the guy, though I do think he's alright and fairly down-to-earth by Hollywood standards (from what little I know about him).

[edit:] I'm also not gonna bash the NRA, because like all polemico groups it has its good and bad points, and its poignant, insightful, and embarrassing moments. I think my stance on the gun debate has been fairly fleshed out here in the past, and without more being said on the topic at this point I truly can't be bothered to delve into it all again.[end edit]

That said, your bile towards him is obviously the result of more emotion than intelligence. You dislike folks who bash the NRA so much you can't even articulate why. For that reason, I point out that if you're allowed to blather along so stupidly, George Clooney sure as hell can. [img]tongue.gif[/img]

[ 01-21-2003, 12:39 PM: Message edited by: Timber Loftis ]

I'm highly offended that you give him carte blanche to blather along! [img]tongue.gif[/img]

LOL! Good show Timber. Blather on you say, fair enough your entitled to your opinions too in my book, even when they are at my expense. ;)
But, you are of course on to something, though, not what you may be thinking you are. I can articulate more than fine about my reasoning for backing members' of the NRA, I gave a sorry example of it already (sorry in the sense of how others think about trust for instance). That actually says volumes Timber, and I'm not even an NRA member! Although, the more goofy reaction from the left I hear, the more it makes sense to join. Personally, I will always trust someone fathoms more, who says you have the right to do something, more than someone who says they want to do something *for* me. How's that for "blather"? ;)
Emotion does in fact come into play in this debate Timber. The Alzheimer thing hits very close to home in several instances. Not to mention the local chapter is a customer of mine, and a benificiary of my yearly charitable contributions/time. In addition, I know a great many people who *ARE* members of the NRA, and to date, I know of NONE, that even *remotely* come close to the espoused definement by the, "know absolutely nothing about the issue" left. Talking about emotion versus intelligence, well now Timber, the proof is in the pudding (as again, given by examples in a previous post about trust).
Comments like those of Clooney's, aren't the exception, they're the rule from *that* crowd. So, if I am so unclear about *my* stance on the NRA, please tell me why the left fears that group so much? Could it be, that they have no talons sunk into it, thus no control over the membership at all?

:edit: TL, just read your comments about not getting into the debate again. Your additional comments are RIGHT ON THE MONEY about groups etc. IMO. ;) :Edit:

[ 01-21-2003, 01:06 PM: Message edited by: ElricMorlockin ]

<font color="#ffccff">Clooneys remarks are callous and mean, he is showing that he is in fact a person of low character and no class. He has the right in this country however to make a complete ass of himself.

It just goes to show that the left and their talk of everyone having the right to their opinion, wether it is about gays, war, guns or drugs...Unless that opinion is from someone on the right, the anti-war demonstrators this weekend were quite happy to attack and harm the pro-bush supporters who were out. Oh yes, lets get rid of guns, war and people who want to own guns and support the president...they don't have the right to THEIR opinions. You really have to love the hypocracy of the left. </font>

Thanks for taking the ribbing well, Elric.

Look, I'm glad that the NRA exists, and I'm glad it's namby-pamby leftist opposition exists. If either one ceased to exist, I would no longer be the reasonable middle-ground. ;)

As for the KKK mention - look, folks, let's be real. The NRA is big in the south, where the KKK still exists. Surely, there will be some crossover members. I'm sure it is as embarrased by those members as any organization desiring credibility ought be.

And, MagiK, the hypocricy of the left you mention (and I agree) obviously exists as well for the right too. I offer this very thread and all text typed or incorporated in it as evidence to support my claim. :D

Finally, let's remember than any digression into gun ownership we take begins with one big note: you do not have carte blanche in this country to own guns. The feds, state, and local governments all dictate certain things about gun ownership - hurdles you must jump through or limits you must abide by. The 2nd Amendment is by no means absolute. Don't act like it is.

The worst I have read about the recent anti-war demonstrations was some civil-disobience. Nothing about anti-war folks mixing it up with the pro-war people. Or do the pro-war folks feel attacked just by the fact the so many came out to protest? Or that only 42% of americans now think that Bush has made a case of war?

[ 01-21-2003, 01:19 PM: Message edited by: Rokenn ]

Nearly as distastful as the this: NRA comes to town on heels of Colorado school massacre

Then in an interview with Micheal Moore in Bowling for Columbine he defends it.

Perhaps for a different thread but what the hell! TL your comment about absolute rights to gun ownership is interesting to be honest. Of all the Bill of Rights, why is this so, while the others ARE considered absolutes?
For instance, the VI guarantees everyone a fair and unbiased trial or better the XIII prohibits me from holding slaves (if in fact I, for some unkown reason decided I wanted one). Those *are* etched in stone, yet the SECOND one isnt it? Jefferson was very specific on the original configuration of the ammendments.
shortened version "Our first is all about free excercise (religious freedom, speech and press), and the second guarantees the first."

<font color='white'>I am not sure if you were joking here, but that is a load of nonsence. First off Sean Penn and people like him are stupid. Are you not aware of the things he did? We allowed him self to be used by Saddam Hussien, thats what he did. Second of Heston does not have a serious case of Alzhimers, or atleast he is not very deep into it yet.

Aslo, if you think that was the message of his 'joke' then you dont know George Clooney. Everyone knows he hates the NRA.

IT WAS IN POOR TASTE.

'He annouced again today he had Alzhimers'. That had nothing to do with the NRA! He only mentioned the NRA when he was asked if he took it out of context. </font>

Sorry, Elric, you misunderstand. All constitutional rights are limited in some way or another. Plus the 13th Amendment is not the Bill of Rights (which is the first 10 Amendments). That said, here are some examples:

1st Amendment:
Right to Speech - Any state or local government can limit the time/place and manner of speech - making you check local calendars and schedule your protest or gay parade at specified times. Also, some speech is NOT protected speech - like commercial speech.

Right to Free Exercise of Religion - Basically abolished considering how much Justice Scalia limited it in his Smith v. Employment Division case. It got hit hard because in that case 2 Native Americans were fired from work for using peyote. They went to court seeking unemployment benefits based on the denial of their free exercise. You cannot, except in some cases, refuse health care or education to your kids, no matter what your religion states. You cannot kill, maim, or even violate cruelty to animals laws based on religion.

Right to Freedom of the Press - very strong. But, again not absolute. Just ask the reporters surrounding Watergate, Whitewater, and Iran Contra.

8th Amendment: Prohibiting cruel and unusual punishment. Basically abolished - no case has been won on this notion in decades. Note that death penalty is ruled not cruel and unusual.

I have more examples, but not the time. Do an ALLTHEWEB search though and find out for yourself.

I've liked George Clooney and though I haven't agreed with his politics, I understand it's his decision whether or not to use his celebrity status to put forward his cause or causes.

What I don't understand is his taking pleasure in discovering that someone has a horrid disease. He thinks it's a good thing simply because he disagrees with someone's politics and then uses his celebrity to publicly gloat? It's in the poorest of taste and actually belittles his position in the debate. "Hey guns are bad and they kill people, so lets wish death and dehabilitating diseases on all those who oppose us." Not too classy, and unfortunately, lets me know more about him as an individual than I wanted to know. :(

Sean Penn? He cracks me up. He was hilarious in "Fast Times At Ridgemont High" and even funnier as a peace movement Hollywood guy who can't help but punch every cameraman within arm's reach. Too funny! [img]graemlins/hehe.gif[/img]

[ 01-21-2003, 02:19 PM: Message edited by: Ronn_Bman ]

Maybe she will... an x-rated award. :D

It is past time that we revived the House Un-American Activities Committee.

I'm sure it is on John Ashcroft's list.

Wasn't there a circuit court opinion in the last few months saying that the second amendment did not guarantee the right of private citizens to bear arms and actually only guaranteed the right of states to form 'well regulated militias'?

<font color=orange>Yes, a 3 judge panel of the 9th circuit court in California
did say that, but apparently the ruling doesn't apply to the whole US, just the states the are in the 9th Circuit Court. Last year the 5th Circuit court ruled just the opposite and the US Sepreme Court refused to hear an appeal. You can read about both cases here.

http://www.washtimes.com/national/20021217-843548.htm

Funny how this thread got highjacked to a debate on guns, when it started out about some actor shooting his mouth off. :( </font>

Before MagiK comes in here talking about the horrible liberal left and its namby-pambyism in the 9th Circuit, I will note that the 9th Circuit (includes CA and HI) is known for VERY progressive (and wacky) decisions. It gets overturned by the Supreme Court more than any other circuit - especially with a conservative Supreme Court whose Chief Justice's absolute biggest issue is limiting federal power.

Who really cares what actors say about one another?

They are just people like everyone else. If you heard average joe down the road saying such things would you really care? Probaly not. If actors do a good job entertaining then give them credit but leave their personal lives alone.

Charelton Heston was a great actor but has said some very stupid things in the past as well, remarks that were even racist.

I do believe anyone who says anything should be careful that it isn't being brodcasted by the media when they say it. Look at what happened to that Canadian who worked for the government. She had a negative opion about Bush, the media was in the right place at the right time and she was crucified. So actor or nobody you should be careful what you say when the media is around. Does it matter that it was Clooney who said it.

[ 01-22-2003, 12:37 PM: Message edited by: pritchke ]