<font face="Verdana" size="3" color="#00FF00"> Johnny Depp bashes US leaders.

http://jam.canoe.ca/JamMovies/sep3_depp-ap.html

Funny he waited several weeks until after his movie Pirates had been out. They can still bycot his DVD when it comes out.</font>

[ 09-04-2003, 04:54 PM: Message edited by: pritchke ]

His wife is hot! :D

<font color='white'> This isn't the first ignorant thing he has said. I can give you a whole collection if you want.

Its too bad he was brillant in PotC. </font>

In what words and in what aspect was what he said ignorant IR. He used what quite a few people would see as a readily apt metaphor to describe US foriegn relations, and he scoffed at the whole "Freedom Fries" thing. You can term him different, and "not blindly patriotic enough for your tastes" and ungrateful and a whole bunch of things - just doesn't seem to me on the quotes in this article that they add up to ignorant.

Still - one man's meat is another man's poison.

<font color='white'> Sorry Davros, but considering all the other stuff he has said, anything that comes out of his mouth seems too ooze ignorance.

But to answer your question, since I hate to see my questions go unanswered, the fact he said 'America is Dumb'...What is that suppose to mean? America, the way it is geographicaly shapped? The people (the same people that give him most of his money), the politcians?

He can stay in France as far as I am concerned.</font>

[ 09-04-2003, 06:15 PM: Message edited by: Iron_Ranger ]

Please to qualify then, by inserting a "From my perspective he has previously demonstrated ignorance" somewhere. To describe what he said in this instance as ignorant, or to describe the man as ignorant is clearly a broad brush statement that is both inaccurate and designed to try and place a slur based heavily on opinion and environment of the individual.


Edit : and please to note that I quoted the above before you edited it. I did not shorten what you said to suit ;) .

[ 09-04-2003, 06:22 PM: Message edited by: Davros ]

<font color = lightgreen> [img]graemlins/erm.gif[/img] He's an actor. If he isn't saying his lines in a movie, then ignore whatever he says.

Why do people insist upon believing that entertainers are political pundits or social gurus? :rolleyes: </font>

But also by the same token, why do many people put down actors and write them off as 'stupid'? Some are dumb, some are smart - acting as a profession does not indicate any level (pos of neg) of intelligence or social awareness.

It is not the first time I read that argumentation. But Azred ... do we live in a democracy ? "Democracy" means "the power to the people". Politics is NOT supposed, in a democracy, to be a job that only specifically skilled and knowleadgeable people are supposed to perform - politics concerns all citizens, and all citizens have the right to express their say because it defines what kind of society we all want to live in.

What you are advocating, Azred, is dictatorship - where the public concerns and decisions are confiscated by a few.

He has the right to speak. You have the right not to listen. ;)

Well, I can't really speak for the everyone else, but America is not a Democracy. The electoral college means that it is technicaly possible for a canidate that no one voted for to become president[1] (This would probably be the end of the electoral college). There are examples where the canidate that people voted for didn't get electoral vote. Good examples of this include the 1876 presidental election in South Carolina, Louisiana, and Flordia (and possibly Oregon depending on who you ask), this was not an issue of faithless electors, but rather was due to the republican lead state governments refusing to accept thousands of (democratic) votes, and then certifying fraudulant results. Another example is the election of 1836 in Virginia where the states electors refused to vote for VP canidate Richard Johnson after alligations that he had lived with a black woman.

A full list of faithless electors is avaible at http://www.fairvote.org/e_college/faithless.htm


[1] This is tecnhicaly illegal in some (24) states, but usually the punishments are pathetic. For example, in Oklahoma, electors must take an oath to vote for the candidate to whom they are pledged. Violators can be found guilty of a misdemeanor and be subject to a fine of up to $1,000. A fine that small isn't going to stop someone who has decided to screw up the election.

This is exactly how the electoral college is supposed to work. The electors are supposed to be competent, and therefor are able to overrule a poor decision by the voters. For example, in 1912, James S. Sherman died three days before the election, but still managed to win electoral votes, electing a dead man is what I would call a "poor decision", another example of this is Horace Greeley who was alive for the election, but died before the electoral votes were cast.