Opinionated actors....SHUT UP!

[Bebop]

Let's have a cigar and enjoy the rest of this Sunday!

From one ex-uniformed individual to another: I salute you! :cheers1:

 

[Mr. Lucky]

If you don't like what you are hearing, you can just turn off the...

BEEEEEEEEEEP.....

 

[Dixon Cannon]

Alright! You're just inviting me to jump in here!!...

I believe that the only difference is the MICROPHONE! What I mean by that is, I've spoken with some "regular" people on various topics (including politics) that had some pretty dump opinions too. (Like the airline pilot who insisted that alcohol enhanced his abilities and that there shouldn't be any drunk driving laws! Wow! That was shocking!)

The point is that everyday folks like us can be just as opinionated and off-base as any of the celebrities that we hear on TV. The difference is that the microphone (and camera) distribute their opinions to a far wider audience. Those opinions then become the opinions and the "knowledge" of some of those folks that we talk to.

I always felt that if I were given the opportunity to talk casually and one-on-one with the likes of Sean Penn, I might be able to set him straight! (I have always regretted that John Lennon never had the chance to talk with me before he died!! )

That being said, it is true the everyone has an opinion and some people feel like they are important enough to give theirs - especially if there is an unwitting audience. It's really up to each individual to decide who's opinion has the merit (and that's usually determined by the opinions one holds themselves). In between is discussion and conversation.

And that, is mine!

-dixon cannon

 

[luvthatlulu]

Oh, Lord...here we go again!!!

I always felt that if I were given the opportunity to talk casually and one-on-one with the likes of Sean Penn, I might be able to set him straight!

I'm sure Sean Penn feels the same way.

See...this quote says it all about us. We all believe going in that we are right and it's the other guy who is all wrong. What makes you think that Sean Penn couldn't set you straight under the same set of circumstances? Too close-minded? If we are all so sure that our position(s) are unassailable, why should we fear any discussion to the contrary in the first place? [huh]

 

[PrettySquareGal]

I agree! If I hear one more actress talk about faux boobs and botox as part of a beauty routine I'll just go mad!

 

[Viola]

But, isn't it equally strange that, when the actors and artists were all in agreement and gung-ho with the majority of us (for example, post 9/11 and Toby Keith's jingoistic "put a boot in your a**" attitude -- by the way, what branch of the military did he finally join?) we applauded and encouraged their efforts. Now, here we stand ready to pull the plug on their voices if they dare to disagree. Amazing. :eusa_doh:

I don't know if its where I live, but the only people I knew who even knew who Toby Keith WAS, were deriding him as an ignorant know-nothing and were quite willing to shut him up.

But...boycotting the Chicks, now THAT was unacceptable and un-American.

 

[luvthatlulu]

Must be a thing where your live.

I don't know if its where I live, but the only people I knew who even knew who Toby Keith WAS, were deriding him as an ignorant know-nothing and were quite willing to shut him up.

But...boycotting the Chicks, now THAT was unacceptable and un-American.

Here in East Tennessee, they cheered Toby and jeered the Chicks. Turns out now 70% of the country agrees with the Chicks. But who knew then? WE weren't ready to hear what they had to say.

 

[Dixon Cannon]

That's easy...

I'm sure Sean Penn feels the same way.

See...this quote says it all about us. We all believe going in that we are right and it's the other guy who is all wrong. What makes you think that Sean Penn couldn't set you straight under the same set of circumstances? Too close-minded? If we are all so sure that our position(s) are unassailable, why should we fear any discussion to the contrary in the first place? [huh]

Check their premise! I learned that from Ayn Rand; if you start from a faulty premise, your entire argument is flawed. That is Sean's problem - a faulty premise. I could help him with that.

-dixon cannon

 

[Diamondback]

Not trying to shut anyone up myself, just asking that if you're gonna be carrying on like an expert, you at least make an effort to know what you're talking about, even if it's just a casual, "hobby-level" effort.

I would never advocate suspension or revocation of the First Amendment for anyone. "Everyone has the right to be an idiot, and everyone else the right to call them one" after all... And anyone who would, speaking as someone who swore an oath to preserve, protect and defend the Constitution against all enemies foreign and domestic (though I have neither rank nor commission yet), is angling for a piece of me, too. (Serving size: spectacular overdose.) A salute, from a would-be soldier, to all currently or formerly-uniformed individuals above.

 

[luvthatlulu]

Check their premise! I learned that from Ayn Rand; if you start from a faulty premise, your entire argument is flawed. That is Sean's problem - a faulty premise. I could help him with that.

-dixon cannon

Good point. I don't know what the exact fault is in Sean Penn's premise because I don't hang on his every word; however, I think you're agreeing that having an open dialogue with those we disagree whole-heartedly with is always a good start to mending it?

 

[Viola]

I wouldn't try to shut anyone up...even if you're in the Klan, step right forward and share that with the crowd.

I like to know who the idiots are.lol

 

[Diamondback]

I like to know who the idiots are.lol

You and me both, dear lady... I like to know who's potentially likely to do something unbelievably stupid and who isn't.

 

[Dixon Cannon]

Good point. I don't know what the exact fault is in Sean Penn's premise because I don't hang on his every word; however, I think you're agreeing that having an open dialogue with those we disagree whole-heartedly with is always a good start to mending it?

Now there's an opinion I can agree with! This reminds of conversations that took place on my street as a kid growing up. My Dad drove a Chevy, my pal Billy's Dad was Ford man. My Dad bought Borden's milk, Billy's bought McCarthur's. We drank Tang, they drank orange drink. It went on and on!

Those are subjective opinions. Each one based on ones' biases, tastes and preferences. There literally is no point in arguing about it.

On the other hand when Billy starts telling that the earth is flat (or is only a couple of thousand years old!) Or that 2 and 2 make 5. Those are opinions based on a faulty premise. Those are arguments against objective facts! One could argue again that there is no point in arguing with one who holds such daft opinions. But I dare guess, a few minutes in conversation with me (or you, for that matter) that opinion can be changed... and for the better! Ignorance is just unknowing, but stupid is still stupid.

-dixon cannon

P.S. I once had the pleasure of watching two teachers, one a math teacher and one and english teacher argue about which is proper: "7 and 5 IS 11" or "seven and five ARE eleven". Back and forth they went until someone asserted the opinion that "7 Plus 5 = TWELVE" !

 

[luvthatlulu]

Oops, Lulu's home...

Gotta go back outside to my "cigar room"! Thanks to all for a spirited discussion.

 

[Matt Deckard]

I don't pretend to be an expert. There are those smarter and wiser than myself that run countries better and lead armies better (though hmmm).

I've argued many points in the past and tend not to jump into debate unless I have real ground on which to debate. I think what erks me the most is when a celebrity jumps on a cause and then they have no information and no real reason to be part of that cause other than the he or she wanting to be part of a cause.

But, when it comes to celebrities using their popularity to become spokemen for a cause... well why not? they have the notariety, they have the audience. The 'Chicks' knew what they were saying when it was said and in many cases it was what many were thinking though would not voice. When Bill Maher's show ended it was because he made a statement that most of America thought was terrible. Though put him off the air for stating an untimely opinion? we are the country in which you can make such statements publicly and not be arrested. Celebrities may say dumb things and who knows... the fear may be that others head these celebrities and follow them, though unlike some places we can say these things in defiance of the crowd.

We have the country where they don't laugh at the crippled man on the street. We have the country where we build up people rather than tear them down. Problem is that celebrity power is replacing political power... it's becoming political power. Used to be a time when your parents would come home and watch the news... now you the next generation comes home to watch Heroes and in Heroes is a message. In 24 there is a message. In The Daily show there is a message and in Sesame Street there is a message. People aren't forming their own opinions, they are running away with the tailored opinion. Political figures don't seem to be as savvy as they once were when it comes to spinning people because the people are smarter (in some respects) though prefer the tailored TV message from Firefly than the message from the ill fitted blue suit (can be any political figure).

$ 00.03

 

[Twitch]

Me, I don't care what celebrities think about anything. If they are performers and produce good work that stands for itself. Their opinion about animal rights or underwear ads has no more gravity that Joe Bloe down the street. Even if they do bellow different "political" opinions than mine I don't care as long as they do entertaining work.

Certainly if I was an auto insurance agent working on Lindsey Lohans's accident claim all she'd expect is expedient service and wouldn't care what I thought about anything other than that.

These people have a LOT of time on their hands and are mostly bored as hell. They get conned into lending their names and opinions to all sorts of seedy causes by managers and publicists who think they need constant exposure when they're not actively working on their given product be it film, music or other "entertainment."

If I see a guy who is a self proclaimed eco-green weenie and I don't agree with him I simply don't think of that when he is in-character in a TV show. I don't care! I simply divorce what these people do in their profession from what they say in press releases.

Of course the mainstream media and the Enquirer-type media long ago overlapped and we're bombarded with banal "celebrity" news all the time and that is wack. We are daily force fed "news" about "celebrities" who have never garnered one award in their industry. They are barely "known personalities" and not stars by any means.

At the core of every actor and performer is the most insecure, neurotic imaginable and they fear just about everything regarding what others think of them. The remainder are conceited to the max.

We should take what these schlubs say seriously?

 

[Paisley]

This reminds me of an ad I read yesterday. It was an open letter to Vanessa Redgrave signed by several citizens of a village in Romania. (Ms. Redgrave had spoken out against a proposed mine there.) The letter asked Ms. Redgrave what she knew about their village, its history, mining, or their lives, or the benefits that the new mine would afford (the project included environmental cleanup of mining that had gone on there for 2000 years and would provide hundreds of jobs in a village with 70% unemployment). I don't know whether the costs of this mine would outweight the benefits, but there were clearly some benefits.

The problem with celebrities endorsing causes outside their expertise is that they have the potential to do a lot of damage.

 

[The Wolf]

I'm okay with celebrities talking about what they don't know. That's one thing they do well. Some celebrities actually get curious about a topic a research it. I just think that is what the public should do. If someone likes a celebrity and said celebrity endorses a politician or embraces a cause then don't automatically agree because you like their music or acting. Research the politician or topic yourself and see if you agree.
Decide for yourself after your own research.
That is basically my point of view, however badly put.

Sincerely,
the Wolf

 

[carter]

The moon is down Mr. S.

"Everyone has the right to be an idiot, and everyone else the right to call them one"

or..."It's better to remain silent and be thought a fool than to open one's mouth and remove all doubt." (Who said that?)

I have always been among those who believed that the greatest freedom of speach was the greatest safety, because if a man is a fool, the best thing to do is to encourage him to advertise the fact by speaking. It cannot be so easily discovered if you allow him to remain silent and look wise, but if you let him speak, the secret is out and the world knows that he is a fool.

Woodrow Wilson, "the Quick Comradeship of Letters" address at the Institute of France, Paris, May 10, 1919.

This discussion would become a great deal larger if one were to address the events on the European stage that followed the date of this quotation.
Prologue:
Would anyone declare that the suppression of any voice/all voices in support of one voice was a good thing? Remember, we are discussing suppression not unity. The one voice that overrides and quells all others. On to Europe.
Act I:
Look a bit further and we see that as nations turned a blind, or at least very nearsighted, eye, the supression of other voices on the European stage becomes more widespread. Dissenting voices only survive underground. We hear appeasing and docile voices from those nations in observation. Yet there are some, as yet unheeded, voices raised in concern that appeasement is not the wisest course.
Act II:
The one voice that threatens to overwhelm all Europe is spreading eastward and has been joined by other voices from around the globe. These voices rise, become more shrill, seek to override and quell all other voices. They lash out at those voices of neutrality and appeasement. Now other voices join those voicing concerns previously unheeded. Voices rise in anger and self-defense against that one that would quell all others.
Act III:
After long and fierce debate, those voices that would not be quelled overcome the One. The disparate many have united to become stronger than the One. They have become unified in common cause though they have many issues on which they may disagree.
Epilogue:
On stages throughout the globe, both large and very small, the same scenario plays out time and time again. The result is, however, not always the same.

Peace, commerce, and honest friendship, with all nations-entangling alliance with none.

Thos. Jefferson, inaugral address, March 4, 1801.

I can't speak to commerce but peace and honest friendship appeal to me in any civilized discussion.

Please, let's not discuss the definition of civilized.

 

[luvthatlulu]

The problem with celebrities endorsing causes outside their expertise is that they have the potential to do a lot of damage.

That's true...but only if the people who listen to those celebrities fail to do their part in getting both sides of the issue and then deciding for themselves. The problem isn't that someone whom we may disagree with is given a chance to speak. The problem is too many of us just want to have some "expert" regularly tell us what our opinion should be.

Take Rush Limbaugh for instance. Now I despise Rush Limbaugh. (TJMO. I'm entitled to it. No need to write me dirty notes.) Takes every issue and twists the "facts" to fit his pre-conceived notion of the truth. I pity the "Ditto-heads" who regularly tune him in and simply accept every word from his lips as the gospel truth. But, do I want him silenced? No. Let the man speak. Anyone who does take the time to listen to both sides of the issue very quickly spots his prevarications and half-truths and decides for themself.