This is too good not to share, Hollywood Halfwits

[Ronn_Bman]

Originally posted by John D Harris: Where you watching the same show as I was? If she kept her cool you can spank my butt and paint it purple

My mistake, I saw her on MSNBC's Nachman. [img]tongue.gif[/img]

Sounds like I missed a good one...lol. [img]smile.gif[/img]

[Ronn_Bman]

Davros, when you watch a football game, do you want to watch the players play football or listen to their political beliefs?

I think the key point about CBS's request was that the artists not talk about the situation no matter which side of the issue they were on. It was a musical award show, and they asked everyone to stay on topic. If anyone felt this request violated their First Ammendment rights, they were free to boycott the show. These celebrities are not having any trouble voicing their opinions in public in the appropriate venues, but CBS is not obliged to provide airtime for anyone's political views during the Grammys.

I don't think that's anymore of a First Amendment infringement than asking that acceptance speaches be kept to a certain length. Over the years, the networks have gone to commercial when people talked too long. The First Ammendment doesn't guarantee the right to speak your views to people that aren't interested in listening.

CBS didn't stop Ms. Crow from wearing her NO WAR guitar strap in plain view, nor did they rush the stage and tackle Mr. Durst when he made his comment.

[Davros]

Originally posted by Ronn_Bman: Davros, when you watch a football game, do you want to watch the players play football or listen to their political beliefs?

I want to watch football Ronn, but the players have a right to their political beliefs too, and if I don't wan't to listen then I can be mature about it and stick my fingers in my ears . Having a different belief though doesn't make them Un-American though - ugh, unless it was Australian Rules football of course.

Three cheers for the Adelaide Crows for beating the West Coast Weagles tonight .

[Ronn_Bman]

Originally posted by Davros: Quote: Originally posted by Ronn_Bman: Davros, when you watch a football game, do you want to watch the players play football or listen to their political beliefs?

I want to watch football Ronn, but the players have a right to their political beliefs too, and if I don't wan't to listen then I can be mature about it and stick my fingers in my ears . Having a different belief though doesn't make them Un-American though - ugh, unless it was Australian Rules football of course.

Three cheers for the Adelaide Crows for beating the West Coast Weagles tonight .[/QUOTE]Go Crows! Go Crows! Go Crows! [img]smile.gif[/img]

The point with my examples about football players is that it's fine for them to express their views as well, but I think people would be quite upset if they stopped the game to do so. Before or after the game or anytime they're asked is fine, but stopping the game is inappropriate because football should be about football. That's the way I feel about the Grammy Ceremony, it should be about the music. If an anti-war song won, then by all means it would be germane.

You are absolutely right that having a different view doesn't make them un-American. [img]graemlins/thumbsup.gif[/img]

[Donut]

Originally posted by Davros: LOL - you only have to look at the sub-title to see it scream out as the "Right wing ridicule" column. I agree that some of the quotes I saw were nonsensical, but several of them made eminent sense, and several of them were obviously cut from statements of larger context to convey different impression. I totally agree with the earlier statements that the opinion of Hollywood idols should have no more weight than anyone elses. This site however takes pains to brand all dissenting views as "Un-American" and highlights the dissenters. OK, I am not American, but I know if someone was branding me as Un-Australian simply because I didn't believe the same things on this war - well the concept is a nonsense in itself.

Darvos - here is a quote from an article in today's Times. It's written by their Chief Sports Writer, Simon Barnes. If I tell you that he is barred from entering Zimbabwe you'll understand why I have a degree of respect for him. He is talking about the right-wing in the US:

"...........the right wing defines freedom as the right to believe anything you like, so long as it's the same as me. And if you happen to be different you have to be stopped"

[ 02-28-2003, 08:47 AM: Message edited by: Donut ]

[Davros]

LOL - I only just realised, for once I used the word subtitle in a post with no subtitle. What was I thinking [img]smile.gif[/img]

[Cerek the Barbaric]

Good counterpoints to my post, Davros. I don't mind the Hollywood stars expressing their opinions in an appropriate venue. The fact is they DO have a much greater potential to affect public opinion than the average American...and this can be used for any cause they support or oppose.

However, they also have the potential to "force their views" on others with the excessive amount of media coverage and attention they get. ANYTHING done by a "star" is considered news and will recieve the appropriate coverage. So they have an unfair advantage in presenting their side of the case. That isn't so bad by itself...but then they take the arrogant attitude that it should be obvious they are right and anyone who disagrees is wrong. They also don't like having their views challenged. Bill O'Reilly never criticized the money that George Clooney helped raised...he just asked Clooney if he shouldn't have taken more responsibility to make sure the money went to the intended victims. But Clooney acted as if O'Reilly had branded him a traitor.

I think a lot of the American sentiment towards the political views of Hollywood goes back to the Vietnam War and Jane Fonda. Her public tour of the enemy forces is still considered "an act of treason" by the vast majority of American soldiers that served in the war. I have two uncles that served in Vietnam and Jane Fonda is one name you do NOT want to mention around them.

That was a "slap in thier face" that will never be forgiven.

Yet Hollywood actors and actresses seem to feel even more emboldened to publicly speak out against the U.S. policies. You ask why it's considered "un-American" for them to have an opposing view. On the surface, it isn't. They have just as much right to thier opinion (and to have their opinion heard) as I do mine. But thier "opinions" often are NOT based on factual knowledge, NOR does it offer any suitable alternatives. Basically, they just keep saying they disagree with the policies of the President. Many of them don't endorse the U.N. Inspector's efforts either. They just arbitrarily criticize or condemn the policies and decisions of the current American Gov't. That is what makes people feel their opinions are "un-American" - because all they do is speak out against policy without offering a different solution.

[Davros]

Interesting arguments you make Cerek. And I would agree with you that quite a few celebrities have limited credibility, but massively biased news sheets like the one that was linked to this thread demonstrate a high degree of intolerance with dissenting opinion, and that does little in the way of ackieving credibility for any premises it wishes to espouse.

Sounds like we have managed to achieve consensual opinion (between ourselves and Ronn at least) that it is not Un-American to have dissenting views. Now - where was that Blueberry Pie [img]smile.gif[/img]

[Grojlach]

Originally posted by Cerek the Barbaric: However, they also have the potential to "force their views" on others with the excessive amount of media coverage and attention they get. ANYTHING done by a "star" is considered news and will recieve the appropriate coverage. So they have an unfair advantage in presenting their side of the case. That isn't so bad by itself...but then they take the arrogant attitude that it should be obvious they are right and anyone who disagrees is wrong. They also don't like having their views challenged.

Just wondering... What do you think of Hollywood celebrities forcing opinions on people that don't necessarily oppose your own? Is there an "awg, they're okay" feeling or would you be consistent in your opinions and apply the above to them as well, that they shouldn't mistake their fame for a right to say whatever they wish to say with an arrogant attitude towards those who disagree? Just to name a person who fits that description just the same in my opinion, Charlton Heston.
All meant in the most respectful manner, of course; if my question comes across as rude or presumptuous I apologize for that. [img]smile.gif[/img]

[ 02-28-2003, 09:45 AM: Message edited by: Grojlach ]

[Moiraine]

Oh, my opinion is a very simple one here - people have the right to use the means at their disposal to state their opinion, and you and I have the right to use our braincells and decide whether or not to listen to it. [img]smile.gif[/img]